TEACHING BEYOND BORDERS: A STUDY OF TRANSNATIONAL CHINESE LANGUAGE EDUCATORS’ EXPERIENCES IN THE UNITED STATES By Meiheng Chen A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Curriculum, Instruction, and Teacher Education—Doctor of Philosophy 2025 ABSTRACT The increasing demand for bilingual and world language education in the United States has led to the expansion of Chinese-English dual-language immersion (DLI) programs, heightening the need for transnational Chinese teachers (TCTs). Despite their essential contributions, TCTs encounter substantial challenges in navigating the U.S. educational system, including issues of professional legitimacy, pedagogical adaptation, cultural negotiation, and immigration-related precarity. Existing research often overlooks the discursive and structural barriers that specifically shape TCTs’ experiences, particularly within the context of alternative certification pathways. This study addresses these gaps by examining how institutional discourses influence the professional identities and pedagogical beliefs of TCTs in U.S. K–12 educational settings. Framed by transnationalism theory (Levitt & Glick Schiller, 2004), cultural capital theory (Bourdieu, 1986), and neoliberal governmentality (Foucault, 1991), this qualitative case study investigates two primary research questions: (1) What dominant discourses shape the professional experiences of transnational Chinese teachers (TCTs) in the U.S.? (2) How do these discourses influence their professional identity and pedagogical beliefs? Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, reflection journals, and teaching artifacts from five TCTs who completed a World Language Teacher Certification Program (WLTCP) in a Midwestern U.S. state. Findings reveal that TCTs must continuously negotiate their professional legitimacy, often being positioned as instructional assistants rather than lead educators. Monolingual English ideologies and the lack of standardized Chinese curricula further marginalize TCTs, requiring them to engage in extensive curricular innovation and advocacy. Despite institutional challenges, TCTs demonstrated agency by adopting student-centered pedagogies, leveraging translanguaging practices, and building professional communities to support curriculum development. Moreover, immigration policies, particularly reliance on H-1B visas, exacerbate professional precarity, constraining TCTs' career mobility and stability. Family obligations and cultural expectations further complicate their decision-making regarding long-term professional engagement in the U.S. Through these complex negotiations, TCTs reconstruct their professional identities, balancing transnational cultural resources with the demands of U.S. schooling contexts. This dissertation contributes to the literature on bilingual education, transnational teacher identity, and dual-language program sustainability. It calls for policy reforms that recognize the cultural capital TCTs bring, support bilingual pedagogical flexibility (e.g., through acceptance of translanguaging practices), and address visa-related employment barriers. Additionally, it advocates for the development of research-based Chinese language curricula and targeted mentorship programs to support TCTs’ professional integration. Overall, by foregrounding TCTs' lived experiences, this study provides critical insights into the structural and discursive forces shaping transnational teaching in the U.S., offering practical implications for improving teacher preparation, program development, and educational equity in multilingual contexts. Keywords: transnational teachers, Chinese language education, Chinese-English dual-language immersion, professional identity, translanguaging Copyright by MEIHENG CHEN 2025 This dissertation is dedicated to my parents and my husband. Thank you for always believing in me, standing by my side, and giving me endless love and strength every step of the way. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest and most heartfelt gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Sandro Barros, for his support, guidance, and patience throughout my dissertation journey. His expertise in multilingual development, language politics, and cultural studies greatly enriched my thinking and helped me grow as a scholar. More importantly, his encouragement pushed me to think more deeply about the complex relationships between language, identity, and teaching practice. Dr. Barros was always incredibly responsive to my questions and challenges, offering not only academic guidance but also empathy and genuine care during moments of doubt and uncertainty. His mentorship has been a source of strength and inspiration, and it has been a true privilege to learn from him and work under his guidance. I am also deeply grateful to Dr. Lucia Cardenas Curiel. I still vividly remember the first three doctoral courses I took during my very first year in the program, and her course was one of them. At that time, I was like a blank sheet of paper, unsure of my academic path and without a clear sense of direction. It was through her course that I found inspiration and discovered my passion for bi/multilingual education. Her guidance and teaching sparked the beginning of my academic journey, and I have carried that inspiration with me ever since. I am also profoundly grateful to my committee members, Dr. Jungmin Kwon and Dr. Jiahang Li, for their invaluable feedback and guidance. As transnational educators and scholars themselves, they offered insights drawn from their own experiences, which deeply enriched my work. It has been an honor to receive their advice and support throughout this process. Their thoughtful comments and suggestions have been instrumental in helping me better organize, frame, and strengthen this dissertation. vi Lastly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my loving, caring, and supportive parents, 李文君 and 陈宝义. It was their encouragement that gave me the courage to pursue my education in a foreign country, more than ten thousand miles away from my hometown. They have supported me unconditionally every step of the way. I am also deeply thankful to my husband, 王希允 who has been my constant source of strength, always cheering me on during the most difficult times and reminding me to keep moving forward. I could not have reached this point without their love and support. There is a line from a song by JJ Lin, an artist I have admired since my childhood, titled Before Sunrise, that has always stayed with me: 不要害怕生命中不完美的角落，阳光在每个裂缝中散落。[Do not fear the imperfect corners of life, sunlight will scatter through every crack.] This dissertation, too, may have its imperfections. But I believe it will shed light into spaces once overlooked, illuminating the quiet corners that had long remained in shadow. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ..........................................................................11 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................23 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................36 CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS 1: DISCOURSES SHAPING TRANSNATIONAL CHINESE TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCES IN THE U.S. .................................................54 CHAPTER 6: FINDINGS 2: NEGOTIATING PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY AND LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES IN DUAL-LANGUAGE IMMERSION (DLI) PROGRAMS ......73 CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS ................................................................100 CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS ................................................................109 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................114 viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The demand for bilingual and world language education in the United States has steadily increased over the past two decades, leading to the rapid expansion of dual-language immersion (DLI) programs and world language instruction (Gándara & Mordechay, 2017; Steele et al., 2017). These programs, designed to promote bilingualism and biliteracy, often rely on transnational teachers—educators who migrate to the U.S. to teach their native language in public and private school settings. Transnational Chinese teachers (TCTs), in particular, have played a critical role in Chinese-English DLI and world language programs, which have gained popularity due to China’s growing global influence and the increasing recognition of Mandarin as a valuable language for economic and diplomatic relations (Padilla et al., 2013). Despite their contributions, TCTs face significant challenges in their professional adaptation. Entering U.S. schools through alternative certification programs, many struggle with classroom management, curriculum alignment, cultural differences, and language policy constraints (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). Additionally, institutional discourses regarding language education, teacher legitimacy, and bilingual instruction shape how TCTs are positioned within their schools. These factors influence how they construct their professional identities, negotiate their instructional roles, and develop teaching strategies to support student learning. Existing research has explored the experiences of transnational teachers across various linguistic and cultural backgrounds (Miller et al, 2008), but there remains a notable gap in scholarships on TCTs specifically. Few studies have examined how institutional discourses shape their professional identities, teaching beliefs, and pedagogical adaptations. Additionally, much of the research on teacher retention and bilingual education has focused on structural To 1 address these gaps, this study examines how institutional discourses influence TCTs' experiences, shaping their professional identity and instructional practices. Additionally, this study is informed by transnationalism theory (Levitt & Glick Schiller, 2004) and cultural capital theory (Bourdieu, 1986) to explore how TCTs navigate systemic barriers, draw upon their cultural and linguistic resources, and position themselves within the U.S. education system. By focusing on how these teachers engage with and respond to institutional discourses, this study contributes to ongoing discussions on bilingual education policy, transnational teacher retention, and workforce diversity in U.S. schools. Statement of the Problem The United States continues to face a teacher shortage, particularly in specialized subject areas such as world languages, STEM, and special education (Dillard, 2023). This shortage has disproportionately affected schools in under-resourced areas, contributing to broader educational inequities (NCES2023). Though the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly contributed to the current shortage of teachers (Hingorani, 2023), this issue is not new, especially in underfunded and under-resourced urban schools (Dunn, 2013). Since the early 1980s, education policy researchers have warned of a potential severe shortage of elementary and secondary school teachers (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), and the disparity between the supply of available teachers and school districts’ demand for teachers has been growing since. Teacher shortages are even greater in special education and subject areas like mathematics, science, world languages, and career and technical education (Dillard, 2023). In response, federal, state, and local governments have implemented various recruitment and retention strategies, including easing certification requirements, promoting alternative 2 certification pathways, and expanding teacher recruitment programs targeting mid-career professionals and minorities (Dunn, 2013; Hingorani, 2023; Ingersoll, 2003). These efforts reflect the long-term impact of experienced teachers on student success, particularly in relation to higher education enrollment and increased lifetime earnings (Liberman, 2021). The U.S. government has long advocated for easing teacher preparation and licensure requirements, and universities have responded by developing alternative preparation programs designed to expedite the certification process. These programs aim to enhance teacher quality while simultaneously addressing the shortage of certified teachers (Paige, 2002). Unlike traditional four-year undergraduate teacher preparation programs or graduate certification programs, alternative certification pathways provide a faster route into the teaching profession, offering more preparation than an emergency credential while reducing the time and cost associated with traditional programs (Woods, 2016). Alternative certification programs allow individuals who already hold a bachelor’s degree to bypass the need for a teaching degree or graduate program. Completion of these programs typically results in a standard teaching certificate or an alternative or provisional certificate. Providers of alternative certification include colleges of education, nonprofit and for-profit organizations, and school districts. Although requirements vary by state and program, most alternative pathways compress the amount of time pre-service teachers spend in coursework and student teaching before entering their own classrooms. In some cases, teachers are even allowed to start teaching before receiving their state certification (Callahan & Brantlinger, 2023; Paige, 2002; Woods, 2016). This fast-track mode attracts teachers from other nations, as many have already completed certification exams that demonstrate they meet the minimum requirements for licensure. However, the rapid transition into U.S. classrooms through alternative certification 3 programs raises questions about how these transnational teachers navigate their professional identities, adapt their pedagogical approaches, and confront the challenges of teaching in a new cultural and educational environment. These dynamics are central to understanding the experiences of transnational Chinese language teachers in the U.S., as explored in this study The United States has been a popular destination for international students since the 1960s, with numbers increasing steadily over time. In 2018, Chinese nationals represented about one-third of the international student population in the U.S., with over 360,000 students contributing an estimated $14 billion annually to the U.S. economy (IIE, 2018). However, this exchange has been significantly impacted by shifts in U.S.-China relations, particularly under the Trump administration. Starting in 2018, the two countries entered a trade war characterized by escalating tariffs and retaliatory economic measures (Lukin, 2019; Sachs, 2019). As this economic conflict unfolded, the impact on educational exchanges was stark. In fall 2020, international student enrollments in U.S. institutions dropped by 16% overall, with a notable 37% decrease in Chinese student enrollments compared to the previous year. This decline coincided with broader political disputes, including the closure of each nation’s consulate, first with the U.S. shutting down China’s consulate in Houston, followed by China closing the U.S. consulate in Chengdu (U.S. Department of State, 2020; Feng & Lucas, 2020). These actions symbolized the escalating political tension between the two countries and created an environment of uncertainty that affected educational exchanges. Despite ongoing efforts to recruit transnational educators, recent political tensions and visa restrictions have made it more difficult to attract and retain Chinese language teachers in the US (Amuedo‐Dorantes & Furtado, 2016). The paradox where demand for Mandaring instruction grows while access to qualified transnational Chinese language teachers declines highlights the 4 urgency of examining how TCTs navigate the U.S. educational system. Their experiences highlight the complex balancing act between meeting instructional demands and adapting to shifting policies, cultural expectations, and institutional constraints. Research Questions This dissertation aims to explore how TCTs adapt to these challenges and how the discourses they encounter shape their teaching practices and professional identities in U.S. educational settings. In particular, this study examines the specific challenges they face, the strategies they employ to adjust, and how their backgrounds inform their professional roles. To guide this exploration, the following research questions will be addressed: 1. What dominant discourses shape the professional experiences of transnational Chinese teachers (TCTs) in the U.S.? 2. How do these discourses influence their professional identity and pedagogical beliefs? By addressing these questions, this study aims to provide a deeper understanding of the structural, cultural, and linguistic barriers that shape TCTs’ professional experiences in the U.S. educational system. Findings from this research can help inform teacher training programs, DLI program policies, and school-based support systems, ensuring that TCTs receive the resources needed to thrive in their roles. Significance of Study This study holds significance in several key areas, including dual language education, transnational teacher research, and educational policy. By examining the experiences of TCTs in the U.S., this research contributes to a broader understanding of teacher retention, professional identity formation, and institutional challenges in world language and DLI programs. First, this 5 study fills a gap in research on TCTs. While existing literature has examined the experiences of transnational educators from Latin America, Europe, and other linguistic backgrounds, research specifically focusing on Mandarin language educators remains limited. Given the growing demand for Mandarin instruction in U.S. schools, understanding how TCTs navigate professional adaptation, classroom challenges, and employment constraints is crucial for informing teacher recruitment, training, and retention strategies in world language and bilingual education programs. Second, this study contributes to ongoing discussions on teacher identity, legitimacy, and adaptation in transnational contexts. Many TCTs enter U.S. classrooms through alternative certification pathways, which, while addressing teacher shortages, often fail to provide adequate preparation and institutional support (Callahan & Brantlinger, 2023). This research explores how institutional discourses shape TCTs’ perceived professional legitimacy, language ideologies, and pedagogical decisions. Understanding these discursive influences can help improve teacher training models and mentorship programs that better equip TCTs for success. Third, this study has practical implications for teacher preparation programs and educational policymakers. Many TCTs experience challenges in cultural adaptation, curriculum integration, and institutional navigation, which can contribute to higher attrition rates. Research has shown that teacher retention is closely tied to professional support structures, administrative policies, and job security (Mancuso et al., 2011). By identifying the barriers that hinder TCTs’ retention and professional growth, this study offers policy recommendations for alternative certification programs, licensure reforms, and administrative practices that can enhance long- term teacher sustainability in dual language education settings. 6 Definition of Terms This section provides definitions for key terms used throughout the study to ensure clarity and consistency. Transnational Chinese Teachers (TCTs) Educators from China who migrate to the U.S. to teach Mandarin or other subjects in dual-language immersion programs or world language classrooms. These teachers often enter U.S. schools through alternative certification pathways, navigating cultural adaptation, employment precarity, and institutional barriers as they establish their professional identities (Tedeschi et al., 2020). Chinese-English Dual Language Immersion (DLI) Programs Educational programs designed to develop bilingualism and biliteracy in both Mandarin Chinese and English. These programs typically follow a 50/50 "one language, one teacher, one classroom" separation policy, where students spend half of the school day learning in English (e.g., in the morning) with an English teacher and the other half in Mandarin Chinese (e.g., in the afternoon) with a Chinese teacher in a separate classroom (Sung, 2020; Tian, 2021). In this model, each Chinese teacher partners with an English teacher, and two groups of students share this teaching pair. English and Chinese teachers typically work with the same group of parents and may collaborate in curriculum planning to ensure instructional alignment across languages. Discourse In this study, discourse refers to the ways in which language and communication construct meaning, shape identities, and influence power dynamics within educational settings (Gee, 1996, 1999). Discourse is not merely the words that teachers use in the classroom; rather, it encompasses broader institutional narratives, language policies, and social structures that define 7 who holds authority, whose knowledge is valued, and how professional identities are legitimized. Following Gee’s (1996, 1999) distinction between "Big D" Discourse and "little d" discourse, this study examines both institutional discourses that frame TCTs roles in U.S. schools and the everyday language they use to negotiate their professional identities. Big Discourse refers to the larger ideological and policy-driven narratives about bilingual education, teacher legitimacy, and linguistic hierarchies, while little d discourse focuses on how TCTs use language in interactions with students, administrators, and colleagues to assert their authority and pedagogical agency. Arrangement of the Dissertation This dissertation is organized into eight chapters, each contributing to a comprehensive understanding of how TCTs navigate professional identity, institutional discourses, and pedagogical adaptation in U.S. classrooms. Chapter 1 introduces the study by outlining the background, statement of the problem, research questions, significance of the study, definitions of key terms, and an overview of the dissertation's organization. It contextualizes the teacher shortage crisis in the United States and highlights the growing demand for transnational language educators, particularly within dual language immersion programs. The chapter also discusses the challenges TCTs face in their professional adaptation. Chapter 2 presents the theoretical framework, drawing on Transnationalism Theory (Levitt & Glick Schiller, 2004) and Cultural Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1986). These perspectives offer a lens through which to examine how TCTs interpret and negotiate institutional discourses, construct their professional identities, and navigate linguistic hierarchies in U.S. schools. 8 Chapter 3 provides a comprehensive review of the literature related to transnational teachers, bilingual education policies, teacher identity formation, and alternative certification programs. It synthesizes existing research on the structural barriers TCTs encounter, such as certification challenges, limited institutional support, and visa-related employment precarity. Furthermore, it identifies gaps in the literature regarding the negotiation of legitimacy, authority, and professional identity by TCTs in the U.S. educational context. Chapter 4 outlines the methodology, detailing the qualitative case study approach employed in this research. It describes the data collection procedures, including semi-structured interviews, participant reflection notes, and classroom artifacts. Additionally, the chapter explains the thematic and discourse analysis methods used to examine how TCTs navigate institutional discourses and professional adaptation. The rationale for participant selection, research site description, and ethical considerations are also addressed. Chapter 5 presents the first set of findings, focusing on the discourses that shape TCTs’ professional experiences in U.S. schools. It examines how TCTs are positioned within dual language immersion and world language classrooms and explores the impact of linguistic hierarchies and school policies on their roles, authority, and perceived legitimacy. Chapter 6 continues with the findings by exploring how TCTs negotiate their professional identities and language ideologies in DLI programs. This chapter highlights the ways in which TCTs modify their teaching approaches to align with U.S. educational norms, including adaptations in instructional strategies, classroom management, and student engagement practices. Chapter 7 offers a discussion of the findings through the lens of the theoretical frameworks outlined in Chapter Two. It considers the intersection of institutional discourses, cultural capital, and transnational identities in shaping TCTs’ professional trajectories. The 9 chapter also addresses practical implications for teacher education programs, school administrators, and policymakers, and provides recommendations for improving institutional support and retention strategies for transnational educators. Finally, Chapter 8 presents the study’s conclusions, emphasizing its contributions to the fields of dual language education and transnational teacher identity. It reflects on the broader implications of the findings, acknowledges the study’s limitations, and suggests directions for future research. Potential areas for further investigation include longitudinal studies on novice TCTs’ professional development, comparative analyses across different geographic regions, and the incorporation of perspectives from school administrators and mentor teachers. 10 CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Understanding the experiences of TCTs in the U.S. education system requires a theoretical lens that captures the complexities of their professional identities, the structural challenges they face, and the systemic forces that shape their roles. This study is guided by two complementary theoretical frameworks: transnationalism and cultural capital theory, incorporating neoliberal governmentality. Transnationalism provides insight into how TCTs navigate multiple cultural and institutional contexts, while cultural capital theory helps explain how their expertise is valued or devalued within U.S. schools. Further integrating neoliberal governmentality allows for a deeper examination of how policy, institutional norms, and labor regulations shape the professional legitimacy and career mobility of transnational educators. These frameworks together illuminate both individual agency and structural constraints, offering a nuanced understanding of how TCTs experience and negotiate their professional roles in a globalized educational environment. Transnationalism and the Mobility of Educators Defining Transnationalism in a Globalized Context The concept of transnationalism, often discussed within the broader context of globalization, has been subject to various interpretations in the literature. Tedeschi et al. (2020) noted that while the terms 'transnationalism' and 'globalization' are sometimes used interchangeably, they describe related but distinct phenomena. Klingenberg et al. (2020) defined globalization as a wide array of activities that span social, economic, and political domains, enhancing interactions and connections among countries and continents. In contrast, transnationalism specifically refers to the maintenance of ties between nations through social practices, often operating within or beyond formal structures. This encompasses not only 11 physical cross-border movements, commonly associated with immigration, but also emotional and cultural connections maintained through social media, familial ties, and cultural practices (Kasun & Sánchez, 2022; Peck, 2020; Yeoh & Collins, 2022). Transnationalism is particularly relevant in understanding the experiences of transnational teachers in U.S. schools, as they operate within both the American educational system and professional networks tied to their home country. Schiller et al. (1992) describe transnationalism as the formation of social fields that connect immigrants to multiple societies simultaneously, shaping their identities, professional practices, and decision-making processes. In the context of TCTs, this means that their pedagogical approaches, classroom interactions, and career trajectories are influenced not only by U.S. educational policies but also by cultural expectations, professional networks, and ongoing collaborations with educators in China. Thus, rather than fully assimilating into one national system, transnational teachers engage in a continuous negotiation of cultural and institutional expectations, making transnationalism a dynamic and evolving process (Faist & Bilecen, 2019; Haualand et al., 2016). These definitions highlighted how transnationalism is not merely a static set of practices but a living, changing phenomenon that impacts identity and community in profound ways (Tedeschi et al., 2020). William Robinson (1998) argued that grasping the intricate dynamics of transnationalization, spanning states, economies, and cultures, requires a shift in epistemology. This shift is critical in recognizing how various domains, including language education, are increasingly transcending national boundaries. In this context, the theoretical framework of transnationalism is particularly valuable for exploring how educational practices and teacher identities cross borders. For example, Chinese language teachers in the U.S. must navigate their professional roles and identities across cultural and national boundaries. This navigation significantly affects their 12 integration into the educational system and their teaching approaches, shaping both their personal and professional experiences (Wren-Owens, 2023). Categorizing Transnational Practices and Institutional Influences Though transnationalism involves immigrants who build the social fields that link their country of origin and their country of settlement, not all immigrants become transnational. Portes (2001) categorized actions across national borders into four types: those conducted by national states; those by formal institutions based in a single country; those by multinational institutions operating in multiple countries; and those by non-institutional actors from civil society (p. 185). He labeled the first two categories as international, the third as multinational, and the fourth as transnational. Expanding on Portes's framework, Bauböck (2003) infused these categories with a political theory perspective, emphasizing that while international interactions typically involve state-centric formal agreements and diplomatic relations governed by international law, transnational activities surpass these boundaries. These transnational interactions are characterized by the grassroots and non-state networks that sustain or forge social fields across multiple nations, moving beyond the traditional nation-state framework. Later, Bigo and Walker (2007) articulated the international domain as a complex issue that spans political sociology and theory, advocating for a transdisciplinary approach that transcends the confines of conventional International Relations theories. This perspective enables a more nuanced understanding of the intricate dynamics introduced by transnational interactions. Building further on this concept, Hoffmann (2022) argues against viewing international and transnational dynamics as binary opposites. Instead, she suggests they represent a spectrum of shifting power and authority across different scales and disciplines, impacting a wide range of actors and institutions. Hoffmann’s 13 analysis indicates that the distinction between international and transnational is more fluid than traditionally perceived, recognizing the significant influence that various non-state and institutional actors have in shaping both realms. This extended discussion highlights the complexity and interconnectedness of global interactions, challenging the clear-cut categorization of actions into merely international or transnational. For Chinese language teachers in the U.S., this fluidity is evident in how they construct their professional identities, some may align more closely with Western pedagogical expectations, while others retain traditional Chinese instructional methods and philosophies. Their dual affiliations enable them to enrich bilingual and multicultural education yet also place them in a precarious position where their legitimacy and authority are constantly negotiated (Bigo & Walker, 2007). Implications for Transnational Chinese Language Educators Given the background of TCTs who engage in practices that extend beyond physical relocation, their ongoing professional, cultural, and educational connections with China make them distinctly transnational educators. They are not merely adapting to a new professional environment in the U.S.; rather, they are continuously shaping and being shaped by cross-border educational exchanges, policy influences, and institutional expectations (Bauböck, 2003; Hoffmann, 2022). Their roles extend beyond teaching Chinese as a foreign language, they are also cultural mediators, professional knowledge exchangers, and key actors in shaping global education policy trends. Ultimately, the transnational nature of their work influences both their professional experiences and institutional positioning. While their bicultural expertise is highly valued in theory, the structural constraints of the U.S. education system and broader labor policies often 14 limit their authority and professional recognition. By examining TCTs through the lens of transnationalism, this study foregrounds their complex negotiations of identity, legitimacy, and cultural adaptation, providing a framework to understand the interplay between transnational mobility and institutional integration (Portes, 2001; Bigo & Walker, 2007). Cultural Capital Theory and the Structural Constraints of Recognition Originating from sociology, the concept of cultural capital was introduced by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu to analyze social structures and personal dispositions. In his seminal work, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Bourdieu (1984) explores how aesthetic preferences distinguish social classes and serve as markers of social status. This book delves into the nuances of taste as not just a personal choice but a social symbol. Later in his 1986 essay, The Forms of Capital, Bourdieu (1986) categorizes capital into three forms: economic, social, and cultural, with each playing a crucial role in social stratification and mobility. Economic capital represents money and assets such as land, a house, or a trust etc. Assets can be turned into money and then exchanged for goods or services. Social capital includes social networks that can be used to trade favors. Alumni networks are a classic example of social capital arising from shared educational experiences. Alumni often support each other professionally and personally long after graduation. Cultural capital includes cultural competences that dictate to what level an individual can participate in cultural activities. For example, familiarity with high culture, such as classical music, fine arts, and literature, which is often associated with higher social classes. Bourdieu (1986) further refined cultural capital by categorizing it into three specific forms: objectified (material objects such as books, cars, and art that symbolize social status), institutionalized (formal recognition through academic degrees and job titles), and embodied 15 (knowledge, dispositions, and habits acquired over time through education and socialization, such as linguistic mastery and professional demeanor). These distinctions provide a valuable framework for analyzing how cultural capital operates in different institutional contexts, including education. However, while cultural capital is often considered an asset, its recognition and valuation are context dependent. Not all forms of cultural capital are universally accepted or rewarded, particularly in transnational contexts where teachers must negotiate the legitimacy of their expertise within new and unfamiliar educational systems. For TCTs, working in U.S. educational settings, the cultural capital they bring such as linguistic expertise, knowledge of Chinese cultural traditions, and professional qualifications obtained in their home country, does not automatically transfer into recognized authority within their new professional environments. Within these settings, TCTs frequently encounter structural constraints that affect how their cultural capital is perceived and validated. Their institutionalized cultural capital, such as degrees and teaching credentials from Chinese may be subject to additional devaluation. Similarly, their embodied cultural capital such as language ideologies and professional dispositions that shaped by their experiences in Chinese educational systems may not align with the expectations of US educational settings. By drawing on Bourdieu's framework, this study critically examines how TCTs navigate the complex processes of negotiating recognition for their cultural capital within the U.S. educational landscape. I consider the ways in which institutional structures and discourses on language teaching mediate the valuation of their expertise, ultimately influencing their professional identity, sense of agency, and pedagogical decision-making. This theoretical lens enables an analysis of how power operates through the recognition of cultural capital, highlights the broader dynamics of inequality and opportunity that shape the transnational experiences of Chinese language teachers. 16 The Evolution of Cultural Capital Theory in Educational Contexts Since its inception, cultural capital theory has been widely applied in educational research, particularly in examining social stratification and the mechanisms through which educational institutions reinforce or challenge social inequalities. The understanding of cultural capital has undergone three generations of evolution since Bourdieu’s initial conception (Davies & Rizk, 2018). During the 1970s and early 1980s, cultural capital was predominantly understood within the framework of educational stratification and mobility research, aligning with broader traditions of conflict theory. In this period, Bourdieu's ideas were integrated into American sociological research, focusing on the cultural traits that were rewarded within educational settings (Bourdieu, 1973, 1984, 1986). As educational research evolved, a second generation of studies emerged in the late 1980s through the early 2000s, reinterpreting cultural capital in various ways. DiMaggio (1982) integrated cultural capital into the status attainment framework, treating it as a quantifiable set of highbrow cultural activities that could predict educational success. His work suggested that cultural capital mediates the relationship between socioeconomic background and academic achievement, providing a measurable impact on school performance and access to higher education (DiMaggio & Mohr, 1985). Around the same time, Lareau (2002) shifted the focus toward a qualitative analysis of how families transmit cultural capital through parenting practices, particularly in how middle-class families engage in "concerted cultivation" that structured activities and parental involvement that align with institutional expectations (Lamont & Lareau, 1988; Lareau & Weininger, 2003). This body of research highlighted the nuanced ways in which cultural capital is passed down intergenerationally and interacts with formal schooling to reproduce social privilege or disadvantage. 17 A third wave of cultural capital research emerged over the past two decades, incorporating micro-sociological perspectives and expanding beyond Western contexts. Collins (1998, 2004, 2008) emphasized the role of cultural capital in shaping interpersonal interactions and social recognition, arguing that cultural knowledge is not just a static resource but a dynamic tool that individuals use to navigate social and professional relationships. More recent scholars (Evans et al., 2014; Roose, 2015) have further diversified cultural capital theory by integrating it with global and transnational perspectives, considering how cultural capital is contextually defined and differentially valued across educational systems and geographic locations. A close examination of the three generations of cultural capital scholarship indicates despite the evolution and various interpretations of the term "cultural capital," this fundamental idea, that cultural capital consists of engagement with the elite culture rewarded by educational gatekeepers, remains a key element guiding current research. This ongoing focus demonstrates how cultural capital continues to be seen as a crucial factor in understanding and explaining social inequalities in education (Feng & Tan, 2024). This definition of cultural capital is also the one that will guide the present study. In the case of transnational educators, cultural capital theory offers insights into why some teachers struggle to establish their professional legitimacy, even when they possess valuable pedagogical skills, linguistic expertise, and formal credentials. Schools tend to privilege Western-oriented teaching approaches and native English-speaking educators, positioning non- Western transnational teachers in a subordinate role despite their qualifications (García & Wei, 2014). This tendency is further supported by empirical research showing that East Asian international teachers in the US are often perceived as culturally or pedagogically “different”, which can undermine their credibility and classroom authority (Park, 2017). Such perceptions are 18 shaped by institutional preferences for cultural capital aligned with dominant Anglo-American norms, such as informal teacher-student relationships, monolingual English proficiency, and student-centered instruction (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Schweisfurth, 2012). These systemic biases marginalize the transnational knowledge and teaching styles that TCTs bring into U.S. classrooms, reinforcing the unequal valuing of cultural capital in educational settings. Neoliberal Governmentality and the Regulation of Cultural Capital While cultural capital theory explains how expertise is valued in educational settings, it does not fully account for why transnational teachers’ cultural capital is often devalued or constrained. To bridge this gap, it is essential to incorporate neoliberal governmentality, which provides insight into the systemic and policy-driven mechanisms that regulate labor, shape professional legitimacy, and reinforce institutional hierarchies. Specifically, neoliberal governmentality highlights how institutional policies and labor management practices do not simply overlook transnational teachers’ cultural capital but actively devalue it by aligning professional legitimacy with market-driven priorities. Under this framework, recognition is granted to those forms of cultural capital that serve the goals of efficiency, standardization, and accountability—goals that often privilege Western norms and marginalize alternative forms of knowledge and expertise. Neoliberal governmentality, as conceptualized by Foucault (1991), refers to the ways in which power is exercised through institutional policies, discourses, and self-regulation, shaping individuals’ behaviors and professional roles. In education, neoliberal governance structures position workers, particularly migrant and transnational laborers, as flexible, market-driven, and ultimately disposable contributors to global industries (Ong, 2006; Ball, 2012). This perspective 19 helps explain why transnational teachers struggle to secure long-term professional stability despite being in high demand. For TCTs, neoliberal governance manifests in three significant ways. First, their employment is often structured as temporary and contingent labor, meaning that they are hired to meet short-term language education demands but are not fully integrated into long-term career pathways (Apple, 2018; Darder, 2012). Second, many TCTs rely on visa-dependent employment, which ties their job security to their employer’s willingness to sponsor and renew their visa. This dynamic creates an inherent power imbalance, leaving transnational teachers vulnerable to administrative decisions rather than professional merit (Hua, 2019). Third, neoliberal governmentality places the burden of adaptation on individual teachers, expecting them to assimilate into Western educational systems without structured institutional support (Ball, 2012). By integrating cultural capital theory and neoliberal governmentality, this study captures both the micro-level struggles and the macro-level systemic constraints that define the experiences of transnational Chinese language teachers in U.S. schools. While cultural capital theory explains how TCTs’ expertise is evaluated within educational institutions, neoliberal governmentality reveals how policy structures actively shape and constrain their professional roles. Conclusion This chapter has outlined the theoretical framework guiding this study, integrating transnationalism, cultural capital theory, and neoliberal governmentality to examine the professional experiences of TCTs in the U.S. education system. Transnationalism provides insight into how TCTs navigate cultural and institutional expectations across national borders, shaping their professional identities, pedagogical strategies, and interactions with students, 20 colleagues, and administrators (Schiller et al., 1992; Portes, 2001). Unlike traditional migration theories that emphasize assimilation, transnationalism recognizes that TCTs sustain connections with their home country, shaping their pedagogical approaches and professional identities across national boundaries (Bauböck, 2003; Hoffmann, 2022). While transnationalism explains the cross-border nature of TCTs’ professional identities, cultural capital theory reveals the structural constraints that shape their legitimacy and recognition within U.S. schools (Bourdieu, 1986). Although TCTs bring extensive linguistic expertise, pedagogical knowledge, and cultural insights, their professional status is often contingent on institutional validation (García & Wei, 2014). The hierarchical positioning of TCTs reflects broader patterns of how schools privilege native English-speaking educators over non-Western transnational teachers, despite the latter’s expertise in bilingual education (DiMaggio, 1982; Lareau & Weininger, 2003). To further contextualize these challenges, neoliberal governmentality explains how institutional structures regulate TCTs’ roles, shaping their professional autonomy and mobility (Foucault, 1991). Schools actively recruit TCTs for their linguistic and cultural expertise, yet they do not always provide the necessary institutional support for their adaptation and long-term career stability (Ball, 2012; Ong, 2006). Participants described feeling constrained by administrative oversight, unclear job expectations, and the need to constantly "prove" their legitimacy, all of which reflect the broader neoliberal logic that places the burden of professional adaptation on individual teachers rather than the institutions that employ them (Apple, 2018; Hua, 2019). These theoretical perspectives collectively provide a comprehensive framework for understanding how TCTs navigate, negotiate, and challenge systemic constraints, ultimately shaping their professional experiences in transnational educational contexts. 21 Together, these three theoretical lenses offer a cohesive framework for analyzing the lived realities of TCTs. Transnationalism sheds light on how their identities are shaped across borders; cultural capital theory explains how their knowledge and credentials are evaluated within new institutional contexts; and neoliberal governmentality highlights the systemic forces that govern their labor and professional recognition. In combination, these perspectives reveal how identity formation, institutional validation, and labor precarity are intertwined in shaping the educational trajectories of TCTs in the United States. This theoretical synthesis sets the stage for the study’s analysis of how Chinese language teachers navigate their roles and respond to shifting educational, cultural, and policy landscapes. 22 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW Transnational Teachers This section provides a comprehensive look at the experiences, challenges, and contributions of educators who navigate multiple cultural and educational landscapes. The studies not only highlight the adaptive strategies and identity negotiations these teachers undergo but also offer insights into how their transnational backgrounds influence educational practices and student interactions. By understanding these dynamics, we can better appreciate the complexities and potential of transnational teaching within the broader context of global education. Research on Transnational Teachers' Pedagogy and Professional Development Based on the studies in the recent two decades, empirical research on transnational teachers has evolved to focus on their pedagogical adaptations and professional development needs. Zoeller and Briceño (2022) investigated the impact of transnational teachers on bilingual writing pedagogies in the U.S. Using a qualitative self-study methodology focusing on three cases from a biliteracy development course, the research highlights how these teachers incorporate their unique backgrounds into teaching practices. The participants, all transnational educators, applied transliteracy practices to improve writing instruction for bi/multilingual students by emphasizing language as a system, practice, and identity. The study's findings suggest that such transliteracy practices enable teachers to better appreciate and utilize the linguistic resources of their students, thus supporting more effective writing instruction. Zoeller and Briceño (2022) concluded that educational frameworks should support transnational teachers in developing such pedagogies, which not only enhance the professional growth of teachers but also improve the educational outcomes of bi/multilingual students by recognizing and valuing 23 their linguistic diversity. Similarly, Chen and Barros (2022) investigated the experiences of transnational Chinese language educators in U.S. DLI programs during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the impact of the shift to online instruction on their language awareness. Using a phenomenological methodology, the study reveals that teachers grappled with contradictions in enforcing linguistic homogeneity, the influence of monoglossic policies, and the necessity of adopting translingual pedagogies. These findings align with Zoeller and Briceño (2022) who also highlight the challenges of maintaining monolingual ideologies in diverse classrooms, and both underline the significance of supporting transnational teachers by developing pedagogies. These studies converge in their argument that transnational teachers require institutional support to develop pedagogies that align with their bilingual and bicultural expertise. However, a key limitation of both studies above is their focus on micro-level pedagogical practices without fully considering the broader institutional discourses that structure these teachers’ professional experiences. This study addresses this gap by investigating how institutional discourses shape not only teaching practices but also teachers’ professional identities, especially in contexts where Chinese language instruction is marginalized. Transitioning from pedagogy to professional well-being, Wang (2022) examined the professional well-being of transnational Chinese language teachers in the UK. Explored through semi-structured qualitative interviews, Wang (2022) sought to uncover the interplay between these teachers' well-being and various ecological levels including cultural, institutional, classroom, and personal. The study's findings highlighted the significant role of coping strategies against work-related stress and maintaining well-being amidst professional demands. Specifically, it revealed that teachers deploy strategies such as managing work-life balance and 24 leveraging their bicultural experiences to enhance pedagogical effectiveness. The researcher calls for further research into the well-being of foreign language teachers across different contexts, emphasizing the need for mentoring interventions that support transnational teachers’ unique challenges and strengths. This study not only adds to the understanding of transnational educators' experiences but also underscores the complexities of cultural integration and professional adaptation in a foreign educational setting. Similarly to Wang’s (2022) research, Sadeghi and Pourbahram (2024) also examine transnational teachers’ wellbeing. Conducted in Turkey using an ecological perspective, the study utilizes online interviews with six Iranian EFL teachers, leveraging thematic analysis to explore how significant life changes such as immigration impact their well-being. The findings reveal that these teachers generally experience satisfactory levels of well-being, enhanced by their ability to utilize positive psychology techniques to manage stress. Though both studies (Sadeghi & Pourbahram, 2024; Wang, 2022) highlight the importance of support systems and the integration of personal and professional experiences in promoting well-being, they lack analysis of how institutional structures increase the challenges for transnational teachers. By incorporating structural dimensions, this study offers a more critical perspective on the systemic conditions that shape TCTs’ well-being and professional agency. Transnational Teachers' Identity Development and Cultural Adaptation Beyond pedagogy and well-being, research has also examined how transnational teachers negotiate their professional identities. Focusing on the identity development of transnational teacher educators teaching diversity courses in the U.S, Liao and Maddamsetti (2019) adopt collaborative autoethnography to examine how teacher educators develop identities through 25 teaching a diversity course in the United States as transnational teacher educators from China and South Korea. The study reveals how participants’ transnational backgrounds initially presented challenges to their identity development but gradually became assets within a supportive teaching environment. The findings emphasize the transformation of perceived marginal identities into professional strengths through continuous engagement in the educational setting. Utilizing a qualitative approach with narrative frames and interviews, Ustuk (2021) gathers short stories from two language teachers, one with experience in the USA and the other in Egypt, to explore how they navigate their new teaching environments. The results highlight the identity tensions these teachers face due to the conflicting academic teaching cultures they encounter. The study finds that these transnational teachers undergo significant re-negotiation of their professional identities as they adapt to the new academic cultures. By focusing on their narratives, the research provides deeper insights into the personal and professional impacts of transitioning between educational systems with differing cultural expectations. Later Fairley (2023) reflect on her experiences as an English language teacher with transnational identities through an autoethnographic exploration. The findings reveal that embracing transnationality enriches the understanding of transnational language teacher identities, providing a pathway to self-acceptance and empowerment. Despite their distinct methodological approaches, these studies collectively suggest that the professional identities of transnational teachers are fluid and shaped by their interactions with institutional norms, students, and colleagues. While some transnational teachers experience empowerment through cultural integration, others struggle with the pressures of reconciling competing expectations from their home and host countries (Liao & Maddamsetti, 2019; Ustuk, 2021; Fairley, 2023). These findings indicate the need for targeted support structures to help 26 transnational teachers navigate identity-related challenges and optimize their contributions to diverse educational environments. Leveraging Transnational Cultural Capital in the Classroom Both centered on Mexico-United Stated immigrants, Petrón (2009) explored the roles of transnational teachers of English in Mexico who acquired English as children of Mexican immigrants in the U.S. The study employs a descriptive qualitative methodology and focuses on five transnational teachers. These teachers utilize their unique bilingual and bicultural experiences to teach English effectively, often introducing "real" English to prepare their working-class students for potential future migration to the U.S. Petrón argues that these teachers' transnational cultural capital is a valuable asset in their teaching roles, enriching their classrooms with authentic language use and cultural insights. Ruiz and Baird (2013) explore the concept of transnational teacher education, focusing on enhancing the capabilities of pre-service teachers to effectively address the needs of transnational students. The researchers utilized a mixed-methods approach, analyzing survey data from two cohorts (34 participants total) who had completed part of their teacher education in Mexico and Guatemala under the Bi-National Teacher Education Project. Their findings underline the significant benefits of this international component, highlighting improvements in the teachers' understanding of and empathy for transnational students' challenges and cultural dynamics. Ruiz and Baird (2013) argued for a theoretical framework that integrates traditional international teacher education and transnational teacher education along a continuum of teacher preparation that includes international travel- study. They advocate for this model based on the increased cultural competence and interconnectedness it fosters among educators, which is essential in our globalized world. The study concludes that such international experiences enrich teacher education by broadening 27 candidates' perspectives and equipping them with the skills to better serve diverse student populations in increasingly multicultural classrooms. The findings of Ruiz and Baird (2013) aligned with Petrón (2009) in that educational systems need to leverage transnational experiences and cultural competencies of teachers, which enrich the learning environment and improve educational outcomes for students in culturally diverse settings. More recently, Compton and Alsford (2024) investigated the experiences of transnational teachers participating in a UK-based lecturer development course. Using a qualitative case study methodology, their study involved international teaching staff from Egypt and Trinidad who were engaging in the Post-Graduate Certificate in Higher Education. This research highlighted how such professional development opportunities can transform teaching practices and educators' perceptions of their professional roles within transnational educational settings. The findings reveal that the participants experienced both transformative and transmissive impacts from the course, shedding light on the complex interplay between personal, cultural, and institutional expectations and realities. The findings of Compton and Alsford (2024) echoed Ruiz and Baird (2013) and Petrón (2009), enhancing educators' intercultural competencies and understanding through targeted professional development can significantly benefit transnational teaching contexts. Collectively, these studies suggest that transnational teachers bring invaluable cultural and linguistic assets to their classrooms, which, when leveraged effectively, enhance the educational experience for students. However, despite these insights, the research predominantly centers on transnational teachers from Latin American, Middle Eastern, and Caribbean backgrounds (Compton & Alsford, 2024; Petrón, 2009; Ruiz & Baird, 2013). There remains a notable gap in literature concerns teachers from Chinese teaching context. Specifically, there is 28 little research examines how TCTs navigate their professional roles within U.S. K-12 educational settings, particularly in dual language immersion setting where Chinese is positioned as a foreign or second language. Moreover, existing studies often emphasize the benefits of transnational cultural capital but provide limited critical examination of the barriers that may constrain its recognition and application. For example, while Ruiz and Baird (2013) and Petrón (2009) highlight the value of transnational experiences in fostering cultural competence, they do not fully explore how institutional structures and policies may marginalize transnational teachers or limit their teaching agency. Compton and Alsford (2024) touch on the interconnection between personal, cultural, and institutional factors but focus on higher education context in the US, leaving K-12 context in the US underexplored. This gap underscores the need for research that critically examines not only how TCTs leverage their transnational cultural capital but also how they negotiate identity and pedagogical beliefs within U.S K-12 context. Specifically, there is limited understanding of the dominant discourses that shape TCTs’ professional experiences and how these discourses influence their sense of identity, authority, and instructional practices. This study addresses these gaps by exploring lived experiences of TCTs and analyzing the complex interconnections between external discourses and teachers’ professional self-perceptions. Thus, the present study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of transnationalism in language education and informs policies and practices aimed at supporting TCTs in the U/S. educational settings. Institutional Barriers and Teacher Licensure Policies Despite growing recognition of the contributions of TCTs, institutional barriers such as licensure policies and immigration restrictions continue to affect their professional mobility and 29 career stability. Most TCTs working in the U.S. rely on temporary employment-based visas like the H-1B, which restrict their job flexibility and tie their legal status directly to employer sponsorship. This visa dependency significantly affects their agency in negotiating contracts, seeking better work conditions, or changing school districts. Research by Amuedo-Dorantes and Furtado (2019) shows that such limitations can lead many international educators to settle for less desirable employment contexts due to the constraints imposed by their visa status, which directly impacts their long-term career trajectories. A key factor contributing to this uncertainty is TCTs’ reliance on employer-sponsored H- 1B visas to maintain legal employment in the U.S. The H-1B visa is a non-immigrant visa category that allows U.S. employers to temporarily hire foreign professionals in specialty occupations, including K–12 teaching positions (Bach & Werner, 2013). While the H-1B visa provides TCTs with an opportunity to enter and remain in the U.S. workforce, it is characterized by complex application requirements, employer sponsorship obligations, and strict limitations on job mobility (Bach & Werner, 2013). Further complicating their situation is the highly competitive and unpredictable nature of the H-1B program, which operates under an annual cap of 85,000 visas. When applications exceed this limit, a lottery system is used to allocate visas. As a result, securing an H-1B visa is often a matter of chance rather than a reflection of professional merit or qualifications (Doran et al., 2014). This element of randomness introduces significant instability for TCTs, who may invest years in teacher preparation programs and establish professional ties in the U.S., only to be forced to leave the country if they are not selected in the lottery. Moreover, licensure requirements in many states are not always aligned with the credentials that international teachers bring. TCTs often face barriers in transferring their 30 certifications, completing additional exams, or fulfilling field experience mandates—despite having substantial prior teaching experience. As a result, they may be seen as less legitimate compared to domestically trained peers, a perception that is further compounded by linguistic and cultural biases (Dervin, 2016). These limitations often result in TCTs being excluded from professional networks and leadership opportunities, further reinforcing institutional hierarchies. Although some studies acknowledge visa and licensure challenges (e.g., Wang, 2022), there is a lack of sustained attention to how these structural barriers actively shape professional legitimacy and long-term career sustainability for TCTs. This study addresses this gap by examining how immigration policy and licensure regulation intersect with teachers' everyday experiences and professional identities. By foregrounding these institutional constraints, this study moves beyond the individualized framing of teacher success and instead interrogates how structural factors such as immigration and licensure policy, shape the lived experiences of TCTs in U.S. schools. These insights are essential for informing educational policy reforms that not only attract but also retain and support transnational educators in sustainable and equitable ways. Teaching Chinese Language in the US Chinese language education in the United States has a long and complex history, beginning with the establishment of the first Chinese heritage language school in San Francisco in 1886 (Li, 2015). Since then, the trajectory of Chinese language education has been shaped by immigration patterns, sociopolitical shifts, and educational policies. The development of Chinese language programs in the U.S. has been closely tied to the Chinese immigrant community, which has historically played a significant role in establishing and sustaining heritage language schools (Chang, 2003). With the significant increase in Chinese immigrants during the 1990s, Chinese language education has expanded, both in community-based settings and within mainstream U.S. 31 public schools. Despite this growth, Chinese language education continues to face persistent challenges related to teacher preparation, curriculum standardization, and pedagogical approaches. Challenges in Chinese Language Education and Teacher Preparation Research on Chinese language education in the U.S. highlights a number of systemic challenges, particularly in the areas of language planning, instructional quality, and professional development for teachers. Wang (2007) analyzed the development of Chinese language education through the framework of language ecology and language planning. His study highlights how the rise of China as a global power has fueled increased interest in learning Chinese, yet the existing educational infrastructure remains insufficient to meet growing demand. Using a qualitative research approach, Wang (2007) examined existing programs and policies, emphasizing the vital role of heritage language schools in maintaining Chinese language education. He argues for an integrated approach that bridges heritage and foreign language learning, advocating for the development of bilingual and bicultural competencies to enhance students’ societal capital. Building upon Wang’s (2007) findings, Luo (2016) identifies a shortage of qualified teachers and non-standardized teaching materials as significant barriers to effective Chinese language instruction. The study concludes that while Chinese language education in the U.S. has promising prospects, sustained efforts are necessary to address the structural deficiencies within the field. In alignment with these findings, Luo et al. (2019) conducted a large-scale survey of 619 institutions, followed by an in-depth analysis of 51 colleges and universities offering Chinese as a heritage language (CHL) course. Their study finds that CHL programs are disproportionately concentrated in elite private universities and large public institutions, 32 highlighting a lack of accessibility for students in under-resourced educational settings. Furthermore, CHL programs suffer from a lack of tailored pedagogical materials and inadequate professional development opportunities for instructors. The authors stress the need for targeted investments in teaching resources and specialized training for CHL educators to address the diverse needs of heritage learners. Challenges Faced by Chinese Language Teachers in U.S. Classrooms Several studies have focused specifically on the pedagogical and professional challenges encountered by Chinese language teachers in U.S. classrooms. Zhou and Li (2015) conducted an in-depth investigation into the challenges faced by Chinese language teachers through extensive individual interviews and reflective writing analyses. Their findings revealed that Chinese immersion teachers experience significant difficulties in six key areas: curriculum development, target language use, classroom management, subject area instruction, teaching methodologies, and collaboration with American colleagues and parents. These challenges highlight the need for comprehensive professional development programs that address cross-cultural classroom management, curriculum design, content-based Chinese language instruction, and an understanding of host country school cultures to better equip Chinese immersion educators for success in U.S. classrooms. Similarly, Chen (2023) reviews the effectiveness and challenges of Chinese immersion programs, emphasizing their positive impacts on language proficiency and academic performance while also noting persistent issues in curriculum design, behavior management, and cross-cultural communication. Examining the evolving challenges faced by novice Chinese language teachers in the U.S., Liao et al. (2017) found that these teachers faced significant challenges in areas such as classroom management, curriculum development, instructional strategies, student assessment, 33 catering to learner differences, and collaboration with colleagues and parents. The findings reveal that while classroom management issues declined over time, instructional strategy challenges remained a persistent concern. Challenges related to student assessment and catering to learner differences gradually increased, whereas issues with material development and collaboration generally decreased. Liao et al. (2017) conclude that these challenges are shaped by cultural differences, teaching contexts, and the teachers' backgrounds, recommending targeted professional development to support Chinese language teachers in overcoming these challenges. More recent research has examined Chinese language teachers' perceptions of Integrated Performance Assessment (IPA) and the challenges associated with its implementation. While IPA aligns with World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages and promotes communicative, performance-based assessment (Adair-Hauck et al., 2013), Chinese language teachers often struggle with its integration into classroom practice. Studies suggest that teachers recognize the potential benefits of IPA, particularly in fostering real-world language use, yet remain hesitant to implement it due to concerns over limited instructional time, students' language proficiency levels, a lack of suitable authentic materials, and institutional assessment policies (Chen & Gu, 2024). This study contributes to the ongoing discourse on TCTs’ professional adaptation. It offers practical recommendations for educational institutions, policymakers, and teacher training programs to better support Chinese language educators in implementing performance-based assessment models, ultimately improving language instruction and student outcomes in diverse educational settings. Both Chen (2023) and Zhou and Li (2015) emphasize the urgent need for comprehensive and targeted professional development programs to support Chinese immersion teachers, thereby enhancing the effectiveness and sustainability of Chinese language education in the U.S. Their 34 findings align with Wang's (2007) advocacy for structured language education policies and Luo et al.'s (2019) recommendation for greater investment in tailored teaching materials and specialized teacher training. Similarly, Chen and Gu (2024) highlight the critical need for professional development in performance-based assessment and suggest that without institutional support, Chinese language teachers may be reluctant to transition from traditional assessment methods to more communicative and integrative approaches. These studies collectively underscore the necessity of sustained institutional support, strategic teacher training, and policy reforms to address the multifaceted challenges faced by Chinese language teachers, particularly in curriculum development, classroom management, and assessment practices. While previous research has explored the challenges faced by transnational teachers, particularly in professional development, cultural adaptation, and identity formation, this study builds on that foundation by focusing specifically on TCTs within the U.S. education system. Through an examination of teachers who have pursued their master’s degrees and teacher certification within the same program, this research provides a cohesive lens into their shared experiences. It investigates the discourses TCTs are exposed to in U.S. schools and examines how these discourses shape their professional identities and beliefs about language teaching, particularly in the context of dual language immersion programs where Chinese is framed as a second or foreign language. By analyzing the intersection of their transnational backgrounds with the structural and pedagogical demands of Chinese language education, this study seeks to provide a deeper understanding of how these educators navigate professional expectations, identity negotiation, and instructional practices. Additionally, this research contributes to broader discussions on transnational teacher mobility, offering insights into how educational systems can better support and integrate TCTs, fostering more inclusive and effective teaching environments. 35 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY This study adopts a case study methodology, a qualitative research design that serves both as an object of study and a product of inquiry (Stake, 1995; Creswell & Poth, 2018). Case studies aim to explore and understand the complexities of specific cases, often utilizing multiple sources of data such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This approach is particularly useful for gaining deep insights into unique or complex issues, providing rich qualitative data (Stake, 1995). Stake (1994) identified three types of case studies: intrinsic, instrumental, and collective. An intrinsic case study focuses on the case itself because it presents an unusual or unique situation, while a collective case study involves studying several cases simultaneously or sequentially to identify patterns and differences across cases. Given the aim of this study, to explore the discourses that transnational Chinese language teachers encounter in U.S. educational contexts, and how these discourses shape their professional identities and pedagogical beliefs in DLI programs, an instrumental case study design is most appropriate. This study focuses on a specific group of educators: Chinese nationals who completed a world language teacher preparation program and have continued to pursue teaching careers within the U.S. education system. These individuals represent cases through which broader themes of transnational identity formation, discourse negotiation, and institutional positioning can be examined. Thus, while each participant’s story is unique, the case serves as a vehicle for understanding the wider sociocultural and policy-related dynamics that influence the professional experiences of TCTs in the United States (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Stake, 1994). To frame the analysis of language and identity in participants' narratives, this study draws conceptually from Gee’s (1996, 1999) distinction between “big D” Discourse and “little d” 36 discourse. While this is not a formal discourse analysis study, Gee’s framework is used as a tool to understand how language-in-use (small "d" discourse) reflects and constructs broader social, institutional, and cultural practices (big "D" Discourse). In particular, this lens supports the analysis of how participants narrate their experiences within dominant educational discourses about language learning, professional legitimacy, and bilingual education. By attending to both the micro-level use of language and the macro-level systems of meaning in which that language is embedded, this study explores how such discourses influence transnational teachers’ professional identities and their beliefs about language teaching in DLI programs. Research Context This case study is conducted in a Midwestern state in the U.S. and focuses on in-service and former Chinese language teachers who were enrolled in a post-baccalaureate World Language Teacher Certification Program (WLTCP). This program prepares candidates to teach world languages in U.S. schools, leading to a PK-12 teaching certification in Chinese. Given the growing demand for bilingual education, the WLTCP serves as an essential pathway for transnational Chinese language teachers seeking professional certification and career development in the U.S. educational system. The WLTCP offers two distinct pathways, each tailored to different professional and academic needs. The Residency Pathway is a two-year program that grants a PK-12 Chinese teaching certification and a Master of Arts in Teaching and Curriculum. Candidates in this pathway engage in a structured teaching residency, receiving mentorship from field instructors, university faculty, and academic specialists while simultaneously teaching in local K-12 Chinese-English DLI programs. DLI programs follows a 50/50 "one language, one teacher, one classroom" separation policy, where students spend half of the school day learning in English 37 (e.g., in the morning) with an English teacher and the other half in Mandarin Chinese (e.g., in the afternoon) with a Chinese teacher in a separate classroom (Sung, 2020; Tian, 2021). In this model, each Chinese teacher partners with an English teacher, and two groups of students share this teaching pair. English and Chinese teachers typically work with the same group of parents and may collaborate in curriculum planning to ensure instructional alignment across languages. In this setting, Chinese language teachers provide instruction in various content areas, including math, science, and social studies, using at least 90 percent of target language (Mandarin) of instruction (Chen & Barros, 2022). Meanwhile, English teachers focus on English Language Arts and sometimes take on additional subjects, depending on school structure and scheduling. This immersive approach enables teacher candidates to develop their pedagogical skills while gaining hands-on experience in language and content integration within the DLI framework. The Certification-Only Pathway, on the other hand, is a one-year program designed for individuals who seek a teaching certification without the additional coursework required for a master’s degree. While it does not include a residency component, participants still receive professional guidance and instructional support throughout their training. Both pathways provide financial assistance to support participants during their training. Scholarships are available to adjust tuition rates to in-state levels, ensuring affordability for all enrollees. Admission to the WLTCP requires candidates to demonstrate proficiency in Mandarin Chinese by passing a language proficiency test. Participants engage in coursework and field experiences specifically designed to address the unique challenges of teaching world languages in U.S. classrooms. The program emphasizes culturally responsive teaching, classroom management, and second language acquisition, ensuring that teacher candidates acquire both the theoretical knowledge and practical skills necessary for effective language instruction. 38 The WLTCP serves as a crucial certification pathway for many transnational Chinese language teachers, including the participants in this study. With its focus on mentorship, classroom experience, and professional development, the program provides a rich context for understanding how TCTs adapt to the U.S. educational system, negotiate their professional identities, and develop their instructional practices. While Chinese language education has flourished in coastal states such as California and New York, where large Chinese immigrant populations and robust institutional infrastructures support well-established dual language and world language programs, the Midwestern states present a distinctly different landscape. These coastal regions benefit from long-standing demographic concentration and community advocacy that facilitate sustained program development (Pew Research Center, 2023). In contrast, Midwestern states typically have smaller Chinese-speaking populations and less developed educational support systems, resulting in limited peer networks, fewer local role models, and weaker institutional investment in Chinese language instruction (Pew Research Center, 2023). This geographic and structural disparity creates unique challenges for Chinese language teachers in the Midwest, who often must navigate professional isolation while advocating for the legitimacy of their subject in less familiar educational terrain. Despite the growing presence of Chinese language programs nationwide, existing research has largely centered on teachers working in metropolitan areas along the East and West Coasts (Chang, 2024; He et al., 2022; Luo, 2016; Sung & Tsai, 2019; Wong & Tian, 2024), leaving Midwestern contexts underexamined. By focusing on a Midwestern state, this study addresses this critical gap by exploring how transnational Chinese language teachers construct their professional identities, respond to institutional discourses, and 39 adapt pedagogically in a region where the demographic and cultural context differs markedly from more frequently studied areas. Participants This study recruited five in-service and former Chinese language teachers who were enrolled in or graduated from the WLCTP. To be eligible for participation, teachers had to (1) be originally from China, (2) have studied in the WLCTP as part of their teacher education pathway in the U.S., and (3) have experience teaching in U.S. K–12 public schools. Participants taught across a range of grade levels, including preschool, elementary, and middle school, and were placed in varied program models, such as DLI and world language programs. This range allowed for the inclusion of diverse teaching contexts and professional trajectories. The study was designed to ensure that a variety of voices and experiences were represented, capturing different perspectives on how institutional settings, grade levels, and program structures shape transnational Chinese teachers' identities, beliefs, and classroom practices. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling based on my prior relationship with them as a course instructor in the WLCTP. I reached out individually to eligible teachers via email and messaging platforms, providing an overview of the study and inviting them to participate voluntarily. My familiarity with their professional journeys helped facilitate trust and openness during the research process. All participants gave informed consent prior to data collection. Table 1: Professional Profiles of Participants (all pseudonyms) Name Grade Cheng Fang Pre-k 6 Han 6-8 Ling 4 Qin N/A 40 Table 1 (cont’d) Years of Teaching 4 7 6 5 3 Experience Location of Job Midwestern Midwestern Midwestern Mountain Canada State State State State Cheng Cheng is a young woman who continually pushes herself beyond her comfort zone. Before coming to the U.S., she was a graduate student at a prestigious Chinese university, preparing for a stable teaching career or the civil service exam. However, she soon realized that her program emphasized theory over practical teaching experience, prompting her to pursue further studies abroad through the WLTCP. The decision was financially difficult as her family was not well-off, and she had to borrow money from relatives and friends to fund her education in the U.S. By the time of this interview, Cheng had spent four years living, studying, and working in the U.S. While she had adjusted to the initial culture shock, she often questioned the impact of teaching Chinese to young children still developing their English skills. "I can't teach the content in Chinese because they’re beginners, but I can’t teach in English either, as that goes against the program’s requirements," she explained. Fortunately, her previous volunteer experience at a special education school in China, where she worked with students with autism, ADHD, and learning disabilities, provided valuable insights into adapting her teaching approach. At the time of the interview, Cheng had been teaching pre-K learners in an International Baccalaureate (IB) school in a Midwestern state for two years. The IB framework required a student-centered, inquiry-based approach, a stark contrast to the teacher-centered methods she 41 had been trained in. She experimented with multimodal teaching strategies, using visual aids, gestures, and songs to engage students but still found it challenging to balance structure and flexibility. Beyond the classroom, Cheng faced difficulties in communicating with parents, collaborating with colleagues, and adjusting to an unfamiliar education system. She sometimes felt pressure to prove the value of Chinese language education in a context where it was not always prioritized. Despite these challenges, she remained committed to professional growth, embracing each obstacle as an opportunity to refine her skills and adapt to her evolving role as a transnational educator. Fang As a mother of two, Fang’s path to the WLTCP differed from that of the other participants. Unlike those who enrolled with a clear objective, whether to obtain a teaching certificate or pursue a master’s degree, Fang discovered the program through an extracurricular Chinese language class she had enrolled her children in. Initially hesitant due to her background in chemistry and previous teaching experience in that subject, she was unsure about transitioning to Chinese language instruction. However, the encouragement of family members, many of whom were also educators, and her own teaching experience ultimately convinced her to give it a try. Balancing work, family, and studies was a significant challenge for Fang. She had to adjust to being a student again and attending courses, completing assignments while simultaneously working as an intern teacher in her field placement school. Managing lesson planning, coursework, and household responsibilities was overwhelming, and she often struggled to find equilibrium between her personal and professional commitments. 42 After graduating from the WLTCP, Fang was set to transition into a lead teacher role. However, the onset of the global pandemic disrupted this plan, shifting all instruction online. She taught remotely for two years, but when in-person classes resumed, she realized that virtual teaching had not adequately prepared her for the realities of managing a physical classroom. She had to relearn essential aspects of teaching, from classroom management to fostering student engagement and addressing their emotional needs. By the time of our interview, Fang had been teaching sixth graders at the same IB school as Cheng and had gradually regained her confidence and adaptability in the classroom. She continued to refine her teaching practices, drawing from both her early field placement experiences and the resilience she built while navigating the challenges of remote learning. Han Han’s first year in the WLTCP was marked by instability. Initially placed in a local elementary school, he was later reassigned to a middle school in another city for the following semester before being returned to his original elementary school by the end of the year. This constant shifting required him to teach at three different grade levels, giving him a broad perspective on student development and exposure to various curricula. While this experience provided valuable insights into different teaching environments, it also presented significant challenges. Han never had the opportunity to fully experience a single grade level from the beginning of the school year to its conclusion, limiting his ability to develop effective classroom management strategies and instructional continuity. As a result, when he transitioned into his lead teaching year, he lacked the necessary resources and experience to establish classroom routines, communicate with parents, and maintain student engagement. Despite these struggles, 43 he was fortunate to have supportive colleagues and friends who helped him navigate the demands of his role. By the time of our interview, Han was teaching sixth to eighth grade, and, coincidentally, many of his students had been in his classes during his first year in the WLTCP. This continuity allowed him to build strong relationships with his students, earning their trust and fostering a more comfortable classroom environment. However, he continued to face challenges, particularly in managing student behavior and maintaining engagement. As the study progressed, Han shared an update: he had resigned from his teaching position in the Midwestern U.S. and relocated to a Western state on the West Coast for career advancement and personal reasons. Moving to a region with a larger Asian community, he hoped to explore new opportunities in education beyond classroom teaching, potentially in curriculum coordination, program administration, or language education leadership. Ling Ling’s journey into Chinese language teaching in the U.S. was shaped by both structured training and personal perseverance. Over two years, she progressed from an intern teacher, observing and learning under a mentor, to a lead teacher fully responsible for her own classroom. This hands-on experience was invaluable in shaping her professional identity, allowing her to transition from a novice educator to a more confident and independent teacher. However, the process was not without challenges. The mentor-teacher relationship played a crucial role in her development, and initially, a lack of guidance from her first mentor made it difficult for her to adjust. Fortunately, she was later paired with a more supportive mentor, who helped her strengthen her instructional strategies and classroom management skills, significantly influencing her growth as an educator. 44 Beyond her professional responsibilities, Ling actively sought to engage with her new environment. She enjoyed participating in school events such as music festivals and competitions and took great interest in cultural activities outside of work. Attending sports events, celebrating holidays like Christmas, and embracing local traditions allowed her to gain deeper insights into American culture. Whether in China or the U.S., Ling valued new experiences and the opportunity to broaden her perspectives, often prioritizing personal growth and exploration over stability. Despite her enthusiasm for cultural exchange, Ling also grappled with the long-term realities of staying in the U.S. As an only child, she faced the difficult decision of whether to continue her career abroad or return to China to be closer to her parents. While the work-life balance and structured teaching environment in the U.S. appealed to her, especially in contrast to the demanding educational system in China, the emotional weight of being far from her family was a significant consideration. Additionally, immigration status posed an ongoing challenge, as she was navigating the uncertainty of the H-1B visa lottery, which would determine whether she could remain employed in the U.S. The visa process added an extra layer of stress to her career planning, influencing not only her employment prospects but also her overall sense of stability and belonging. By the time of our interview, Ling had secured a teaching position in a mountain state, reaffirming her decision to continue her career in the U.S. Despite the professional and personal challenges she faced, she viewed them as integral to her growth as a transnational Chinese language teacher. Her experience reflects the complexities of balancing professional aspirations with personal commitments, as well as the ongoing process of adapting and refining her teaching practices in a new cultural and educational landscape. 45 Qin Qin’s experience stands apart from the other participants as she is the only one who ultimately left the field of education. She initially joined the WLTCP with the goal of becoming a Chinese language teacher in the U.S., hoping to build a long-term career in bilingual education. However, her teaching experience was fraught with challenges, particularly in mentorship and professional adjustment, which gradually eroded her confidence in pursuing teaching as a sustainable career. Despite having a strong passion for education and positive classroom experiences in China, she struggled to adapt to the work environment in the U.S. and faced difficulties balancing professional expectations with personal well-being. Uncertain about her future path, she left the program before completing her first year and returned to China for a period of self-reflection. During this time, Qin wrestled with the uncertainty of her professional future, questioning whether she should continue in education or explore other career paths. Eventually, she decided to pursue graduate studies abroad, this time in another country, viewing it as an opportunity to restart her career from a different perspective. She later moved to Canada, where she completed a master’s degree in education. However, instead of returning to teaching, she transitioned into administrative work in the automotive industry. This shift was influenced by both the job market conditions and her reassessment of personal and professional priorities. She found that working outside the classroom provided greater stability and career growth opportunities, helping her rebuild her confidence after the challenges she faced as a transnational teacher. Though she ultimately stepped away from education, Qin’s journey reflects the complex realities transnational Chinese language teachers encounter while adjusting to new cultural and professional landscapes. Her experience highlights the difficulties of navigating a foreign 46 education system, the impact of mentorship and institutional support, and the emotional toll of uncertainty. While she took an unexpected career turn, her story underscores the fluidity of career trajectories and the importance of adaptability in building a fulfilling life abroad. Summary The participants of the study offered valuable insights into the challenges, adaptations, and professional growth of TCTs in the U.S. The participants were selected based on their varied backgrounds, teaching placements, and career trajectories, ensuring a comprehensive exploration of the factors shaping their professional identities and instructional practices. The participants represent a range of teaching contexts, including different grade levels, geographic locations, and school structures. Some have remained in the field, refining their teaching methodologies, while others have transitioned to different professional paths. Their individual stories highlight key themes such as mentorship, professional development, classroom management, cultural adaptation, and employment challenges, including visa and certification processes. These shared yet distinct experiences provide a holistic understanding of how transnational Chinese language teachers navigate the U.S. educational system. The inclusion of one participant who ultimately left the field of education further strengthens the study by offering insight into the broader career trajectories of transnational teachers. Together, these participants provide a rich and nuanced understanding of the professional realities faced by transnational Chinese language teachers, making this study an important contribution to discussions on teacher preparation, support systems, and policy implications for transnational educators in the U.S. Data Collection This study employed multiple data collection methods, including in-depth semi- structured interviews, reflection notes, and teaching materials/artifacts, to develop a holistic understanding of the experiences of transnational Chinese language teachers. Using a variety of 47 data sources was essential for capturing the complexity of teachers' professional identities, instructional practices, and adaptation to the U.S. educational system. A multi-method approach strengthened the validity of qualitative research by allowing for data triangulation, ensuring that findings were not solely dependent on one source but rather corroborated across multiple forms of evidence (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011; Maxwell, 2013). The semi-structured interviews enabled participants to articulate their experiences in their own words while also providing flexibility to explore specific areas of interest or concern that emerged during the conversation. This approach was particularly valuable in uncovering the nuanced and individualized challenges these teachers faced, as it allowed them to express their perspectives while also enabling the researcher to probe deeper when needed (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). Reflection notes provided a more personal and introspective perspective, capturing participants' evolving thoughts, emotional responses, and meaning-making processes over time. Reflection as a methodological tool has been widely recognized in qualitative research for its ability to reveal hidden tensions, identity negotiations, and adaptive strategies that might not surface in direct interviews (Schön, 1983). By examining these written reflections, I gained deeper insight into how participants interpreted and responded to various discourses related to language teaching, professional identity, and cultural adaptation. Additionally, teaching materials and artifacts, such as lesson plans, classroom activities, and instructional resources, served as tangible evidence of how teachers translated their pedagogical beliefs and professional identities into practice. These artifacts provided insight into how participants incorporated cultural elements, addressed linguistic challenges, and adapted their instructional approaches within the dual-language immersion model (Bazeley, 2020; Creswell, 1998; Creswell & Poth, 2018). Analyzing instructional materials allowed for an 48 examination of how teachers navigated institutional expectations and language policies, offering another lens into their agency, decision-making processes, and adaptation strategies (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). In addition to triangulating these multiple data sources, I conducted a member-checking process six months after the initial interviews. During this process, I invited the participants to review preliminary findings and thematic interpretations to confirm the accuracy of my analyses and to provide clarification or addition notes on their teaching artifacts. This step, I believe, enhances the credibility and trustworthiness of my study by ensuring that participants’ perspectives are accurately represented. By integrating interviews, reflections, and classroom artifacts, this study ensured a comprehensive and multi-dimensional analysis of transnational Chinese language teachers' experiences, shedding light on the broader institutional, cultural, and pedagogical discourses that shaped their professional journeys. Data Analysis The three types of data: spoken (interviews), written (documents and reflection notes), and artifact-based (teaching materials) provided multiple perspectives through which to identify key themes. This triangulation allowed comprehensive analysis, as insights from one data source were often reinforced by another. For instance, certain challenges raised during the interviews were echoed in participants’ reflection notes and instructional materials, offering a more nuanced understanding of their experiences. For example, during her interview, Cheng described the difficulties she faced in the early stages of her teaching career, particularly in engaging with students and managing the classroom. This struggle was further documented in her teaching reflection notes, where she detailed specific strategies, she attempted to implement to address these challenges. Similarly, in her lesson plans, she incorporated tier activates to differentiate her 49 instruction to meet students' needs, demonstrating her evolving approach to student engagement. By analyzing these interconnected data points, it became possible to track how Cheng’s professional identity and instructional methods developed over time. To analyze the data, I employed an iterative, three-phase approach integrating thematic analysis, cross-case synthesis, and discourse analysis. The first phase, thematic analysis, involved initial coding of all interview transcripts, reflection notes, and teaching artifacts to identify recurring themes across participants. These themes included issues such as professional legitimacy, language ideology, curriculum adaptation, classroom management, and emotional labor. I followed Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-step process, beginning with familiarization and open coding, followed by searching for and reviewing themes that captured both surface-level and latent meanings. The second phase, cross-case synthesis (Stake, 2005), enabled me to compare patterns and divergences across the five participant cases. While certain experiences, such as negotiating classroom authority or navigating monolingual instructional policies were common across participants, others were unique to particular institutional contexts or shaped by personal background (e.g., visa status, mentor support, school demographics). This method allowed for both within-case depth and between-case comparison, ensuring that my findings reflected both shared trajectories and individual variation. The third phase was informed by discourse analysis, specifically drawing from Gee’s (1996, 1999) conceptual distinction between “big D” Discourse (broad institutional and societal narratives), and “little d” discourse (language-in-use in specific contexts). While not employing discourse analysis as a formal methodological procedure, I used Gee’s framework to examine how participants constructed meaning and positioned themselves through narrative. This helped 50 reveal how institutional Discourses shaped participants’ roles and how they navigated or resisted those framings. For example, Ling described being positioned by her mentor and students as a “helper” rather than a full teacher, a perception that undermined her professional identity. Her reflection notes captured her emotional responses and her strategies for reclaiming authority, including shifting her tone, setting clear expectations, and asserting leadership in classroom interactions. This discursive positioning provided insight into how institutional norms and power dynamics were internalized, contested, and renegotiated. By integrating thematic analysis, cross-case synthesis, and discourse analysis, this study provided a multi-layered understanding of how transnational Chinese language teachers constructed their professional identities, adapted to U.S. educational contexts, and engaged with broader institutional discourses that influenced their teaching practices. Positionality Statement Since 2019, I have worked closely with Chinese teacher candidates in the U.S., teaching courses on classroom management, language assessment, and teaching Chinese in US school settings. As a Chinese international student and transnational educator, myself, I share a common background with my participants, which has profoundly shaped the nature of our interactions. My role is often multifaceted: while I serve as their instructor, mentor, and field supervisor, I also occupy a space that extends beyond traditional academic boundaries. Many of my students see me as both a teacher (40%) and a friend (60%), allowing for a unique and supportive dynamic that fosters both academic growth and personal connection. Our relationship extends beyond the classroom. Together, we celebrate Chinese holidays, cook traditional dishes at home gatherings, and engage in deep conversations about our professional aspirations, personal struggles, and the ongoing dilemma of whether to remain in 51 the U.S. or return to China. I have celebrated their successes, such as passing certification exams or securing teaching positions, and I have listened as they expressed frustrations about visa uncertainties, cultural adaptation, and the evolving landscape of Chinese language education in the U.S. These shared experiences have provided me with intimate, firsthand insights into their struggles and resilience, deepening my understanding of what it means to be a transnational Chinese educator in an unfamiliar educational system. This long-term, multidimensional relationship has also positioned me as a cultural mediator—someone who understands both the participants’ Chinese sociocultural backgrounds and the U.S. educational context. This role informed my ability to interpret nuances in their narratives, particularly when participants switched between languages or referred to cultural references that might be lost in translation. I also acknowledge that power dynamics still existed, particularly in cases where I had previously served as a course instructor or evaluator. I took steps to minimize these influences by reassuring participants that their openness would in no way affect their professional relationships with me or the program. Creswell and Creswell (2017) argued that researchers are a “key instrument” (p. 45) when conducting qualitative studies. They notice research needs, choose participants, and examine phenomena through their personal experiences and values. For this study, I inhabited multiple identities: I was at once an insider and outsider, an instructor and researcher, a mentor and peer. These shifting roles allowed me to develop trust with participants and gain authentic narratives of their lived experiences. However, this fluid positionality also required constant self- reflection, as my own experiences inevitably shaped my interpretations of their challenges and successes. 52 While this closeness has enriched my research, it also presents methodological challenges. The strong trust and rapport I have built with my participants allow for authentic, deeply personal narratives to emerge in interviews and reflections. However, this proximity blurs traditional researcher-participant boundaries, making it difficult at times to maintain an objective analytical distance. I recognize that my own experiences and emotions—my own dilemmas about professional identity, cultural belonging, and navigating the U.S. educational system— inevitably shape the lens through which I interpret their stories. To address these challenges, I remain vigilant in managing my positionality through ongoing reflexivity and transparency in my research process. I approach this study with an awareness that while my insider perspective provides valuable depth and context, it also requires continuous self-examination to mitigate bias. My goal is to leverage my unique position to illuminate the experiences of transnational Chinese language teachers, ensuring that their voices are represented with both rigor and integrity while remaining critically aware of the influence my positionality has on this work. 53 CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS 1: DISCOURSES SHAPING TRANSNATIONAL CHINESE TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCES IN THE U.S. This study aimed to explore the discourses TCTs encounter upon entering the U.S. educational system and the extent to which these discourses influence their professional identities and beliefs about language teaching. By analyzing audio-recorded interviews and teaching reflection journal that they did during studying and working in the WLTCP, this chapter presents the findings related to the first research question: What discourses are transnational Chinese teachers (TCTs) exposed to once they begin their professional activity in the U.S.? Several dominant themes emerged, including the challenges of professional legitimacy, classroom management and student engagement, the role of language policies in dual-language immersion programs, and visa-related constraints. The Discourse of Professional Legitimacy and Hierarchies: Are We Real Teachers? One of the most pervasive discourses experienced by TCTs concerns their struggle for professional legitimacy in the field placement school while they were in the WLTCP. Many participants reported instances in which their expertise, qualifications, and authority were questioned: either explicitly by colleagues, parents, or students, or implicitly through institutional structures that positioned them as an assistant role rather than the teacher in the classroom. This struggle was particularly evident in interactions with mentor teachers during the early stages of their careers, as Ling, reflected that respect from students depended largely on how their mentor teacher positioned them: 如果你的导师很尊重你，他/她把你当一个老师的话，你的这一路上会很平坦……但如果 你的导师本身就把你当成一个助手，学生也很难去尊重你。 [If your mentor respects you 54 and treats you as a teacher, your path will be much smoother. However, if your mentor views you as merely an assistant, it will be difficult for students to respect you as a teacher.] 1 Ling’s statement highlights the power dynamics within the school, where the mentor teacher’s perception of the transnational teacher influences students’ attitudes. She later added that: 当你又是老师又是学生的时候是会有困扰的……学生他就会想说，既然你也是学生，你和 我们的地位是一样的，我可以不需要听你的 [When you are a teacher and a student at the same time, it can be confusing… Students may think, ‘Since you are also a student, we are on the same level, so I don’t need to listen to you’] This ambiguity in professional identity places TCTs in a precarious position, where their authority is contingent on the way they are introduced and framed within the school hierarchy. Even when mentors introduce them as teachers, the lingering perception of them as assistants persists. This issue becomes particularly pronounced when TCTs transition into their second year and officially take on the role of teacher of record, yet students and parents continue to view them through the lens of their previous assistant role. 1 Note: All interviews were conducted primarily in Mandarin Chinese; therefore, quotations from the original transcripts were in Chinese and have been translated into English by the author. Some sentences may appear grammatically incorrect in English due to differences in linguistic structure. Where necessary, I added missing grammatical components in brackets to ensure clarity while maintaining the literal translation. Excerpts and quotations from artifacts and teaching reflection journals were originally written in English and are presented as-is without modification. 55 This phenomenon is reflective of broader hierarchical structures within U.S. schools, where transnational teachers often occupy a marginal position, lacking the institutional authority afforded to their native-born colleagues (Varghese et al., 2016). These hierarchies do not simply influence how students perceive TCTs but also shape their interactions with administrators and fellow teachers, reinforcing exclusionary professional dynamics. For some teachers, this lack of legitimacy extended beyond student perception, affecting their interactions with colleagues and administrators. Qin’s case provides an extreme example of how these discourses of marginalization can lead to career attrition. From the outset of her placement, Qin’s mentor teacher failed to support her, instead maintaining a performative mentorship that existed only on paper. She described the lack of support and the structural inequalities she faced: 所有该做的事他都没做，他在外人面前假装他帮助了我，但私下完全不理我。 [He (Qin’s mentor teacher) never did anything he was supposed to do. In front of others, he acted as if he were supporting me, but privately he completely ignored me.] This lack of mentorship not only left Qin struggling with classroom management and instructional planning but also reinforced her exclusion from professional networks within the school. Without the necessary institutional backing, she found it increasingly difficult to advocate for herself. Over time, the accumulation of these exclusionary practices, coupled with instances of racial discrimination, led Qin to leave the teaching profession entirely: 我们……没有话语权。 [We… have no authority （or say） in the matter.] Qin’s experience underscores how hierarchical school structures and professional gatekeeping create barriers for transnational teachers, particularly when their professional capacity is not institutionally recognized. While some TCTs eventually gain legitimacy through 56 experience and resilience, others like Qin found themselves trapped in a system that fails to support them, ultimately pushing them out of the profession. From a transnational perspective, TCTs navigate multiple sociocultural and institutional context, bring with them form of cultural and linguistic capital that are highly valued in certain global contexts but often devalued within the U.S. school systems (Bourdieu, 1986; Basch et al., 1994). Despite their transnational knowledge and pedagogical expertise, TCTs frequently find their professional authority marginalized. The marginalization reflects broader dynamics of neoliberal governmentality, which emphasize accountability, performativity, and competition within the educational workforce (Foucault, 1991; Ong, 2006). The Discourse of Cultural and Linguistic Capital: Being a Multilingual TCT is Both an Advantage and a Challenge The value of multilingualism in teaching is a well-documented discourse in educational research. Bilingual educators play a crucial role in fostering inclusive learning environments, as their ability to navigate multiple languages allows them to connect with multilingual students on a deeper level. This connection not only supports students' academic success but also promotes their personal growth and cultural identity. Palmer and Martínez (2013) highlight that bilingual teachers serve as cultural brokers, bridging linguistic and cultural gaps while fostering a sense of belonging among students from diverse backgrounds. In certain school districts, administrators explicitly recognize the contribution of Chinese teachers and support their presence in the educational system. For example, Qin shared a story about a former colleague teaching in a rural school, where the administration actively acknowledged the importance of Chinese teachers. For example, Qin shared a story of her former colleague who were teaching in a rural area: 57 她们学校校长说中文老师就是我们这个城里最宝贵的珍宝，并且要求学校里的员工和学生 对待中文老师像对待家人一样。 [Their school principal said that Chinese teachers are the most valuable treasure in the town and instructed all staff and students to treat them like family.] A similar scenario was shared by Ling, who described how the school principal at her workplace in a mountainous state valued Chinese teachers in the DLI program as essential assets. The principal acknowledged the significance of TCTs in shaping the DLI program and actively encouraged staff members to support them. 我们校长经常在开会时强调我们这些中文老师的重要性，并且要求如果我们需要帮忙任何 同事都要提供帮助。 [Our principal often emphasizes the importance of Chinese teachers during meetings and has made it clear that if we ever need help, all colleagues should be ready to assist us.] The recognition of Chinese teachers as “treasures” suggests a positive institutional discourse that values their linguistic and cultural capital, particularly in districts where multilingual education is prioritized. This aligns with Bourdieu’s (1986) concept of cultural capital, where teachers’ multilingualism and cross-cultural knowledge function as valuable assets in educational settings. However, while certain schools view these teachers as essential contributors, their linguistic and cultural expertise is not always equally recognized or institutionalized, leading to a paradoxical experience of both inclusion and exclusion (Bauböck, 2003; Hoffmann, 2022). This institutional appreciation, however, does not always extend to interactions with parents and colleagues. While TCTs' bilingual and bicultural skills serve as strengths in the classroom, they also create challenges in professional legitimacy and authority. Cheng, for 58 instance, shared her experience working with parents and how their communication preferences reinforced linguistic hierarchies asserting that: 家长们更倾向去找英文老师而不是找中文老师询问学校相关的信息。 [Parents are more likely to approach the English teacher rather than the Chinese teacher for school-related information.] Given the structure of Chinese-English DLI programs, where Chinese and English teachers partner to teach the same group of students, this parental preference for English- speaking teachers reflects a broader systemic bias. Parents naturally turn to English teachers for school-related inquiries, often overlooking the Chinese teacher’s role as an equal educator. This implicit bias impacts TCTs’ professional identity, reinforcing a hierarchical perception of educators where native English-speaking teachers are seen as more credible and authoritative. Such discourses are also reflected in broader research on racialized labor in education, which demonstrates how transnational teachers, particularly those from non-Western backgrounds, are often positioned as cultural aides rather than core members of school faculty (García & Wei, 2014; Varghese et al., 2016). This devaluation of linguistic and cultural capital presents a unique paradox for multilingual transnational teachers. While their bilingualism is celebrated as a resource, it is simultaneously undermined in professional interactions, particularly when they lack the same linguistic dominance in English as their counterparts. This dual status that being both an asset and a marginalized educator creates additional barriers in their professional integration. Beyond issues of recognition and authority, TCTs also face challenges in advocating for the legitimacy of Chinese language education itself. Many teachers report a lack of structured curriculum and institutional support, which exacerbates their challenges and places additional labor demands on 59 them. Han described the difficulties of navigating curriculum decisions without clear guidance, shared by Han: 我们没有指定的教材，都是指导老师推荐一些材料我们再自己筛选。[We don't have assigned textbooks; our mentor teachers recommend materials, and we filter through them ourselves.] Similarly, Cheng highlighted the lack of instructional materials, requiring teachers to develop their own lesson plans based on personal experience: 这边他没有给你规定的教材，然后你需要自己根据自己的经验去设计教学内容，然后就是 东西都很杂。[There is no prescribed textbook here （her teaching school）. You have to design the teaching content yourself based on your own experience, and the materials are all over the place.] These experiences align with Chen and Barros’ (2022) findings, who examined the challenges faced by transnational Chinese language educators, particularly the lack of institutionalized curriculum support. Their study found that many teachers were required to curate their own materials, often without official guidance, leading to inconsistencies in instructional approaches and additional workload pressures. This lack of structure forces transnational teachers to independently justify the value of their subject, while simultaneously navigating classroom instruction, curriculum planning, and cultural adaptation. From a cultural capital perspective (Bourdieu, 1986), the absence of institutionalized curricular resources means that Chinese language education is not fully legitimized within the broader educational framework. While Chinese teachers bring valuable linguistic and pedagogical knowledge, this knowledge is not formally recognized as part of the school’s structured curriculum, leaving teachers to rely on their own expertise without systemic 60 validation. This lack of institutional recognition devalues their cultural capital, making it more difficult for them to assert their professional status. The Discourse of Classroom Management and Emotional Labor: How Do I Balance Discipline and Student Well-Being? One of the dominant discourses that TCTs encounter in U.S. educational settings revolves around classroom management and student engagement. Unlike the Chinese educational system, where discipline is often maintained through cultural expectations of student behavior and strict authority structures, U.S. classrooms require teachers to actively manage behavior using explicit behavioral strategies, social-emotional learning, and culturally responsive practices (Gay, 2018). TCTs must adapt to these expectations, which significantly reshape their professional identities and pedagogical approaches (Gillette, 2021). TCTs often struggle with student behavioral issues due to differences in educational culture and discipline strategies. In China, students are expected to maintain high levels of respect for teachers, and disruptive behavior is relatively rare. However, in the U.S., students exhibit greater autonomy and are encouraged to express themselves freely, sometimes leading to classroom disruptions (Donnellan & Edmondson, 2019). As Fang shared: 在国内学生都很乖，老师的话就是权威，但是在美国，尤其是中学生，他们会挑战老师， 会不听话，有的学生甚至会直接和你顶嘴。 [In China, students are very obedient, and the teacher's words hold authority. However, in the U.S., especially in middle school, students challenge teachers, disobey, and some even argue directly with you.] The cultural contrast extends beyond student behavior and into parental expectations regarding teachers’ authority. Fang further explained: 61 中国的父母会跟孩子讲，老师有权威性是一个需要尊重的职业，你要听他们的话。美国家 长可能不会和学生强调这点，反而会觉得他们的孩子不管在学校发生任何事老师们都应该 为学生们负责任。[Chinese parents emphasize that teachers hold authority and should be respected. However, American parents may not stress this point and instead believe that teachers should take full responsibility for whatever happens in school.] This difference in parental perspectives reinforces the power dynamics in TCTs’ professional experiences, as they must navigate not only student behavior but also differing parental expectations regarding discipline and authority (Xie, Wu, & Li, 2022). The shift from a teacher-centered model to a student-centered approach requires them to redefine their role in the classroom and develop classroom management techniques that focus on engagement rather than compliance. Cheng elaborated on this shift in focus: 在国内就是没有什么课堂管理的问题，在国内你就专心研究你的教学内容，你的教学方 法，然后你的练习内容，尽量让学生多学到东西。在这边就会更关注学生的各种情感的问 题，还有他们的会要想怎么去吸引他们。 [In China, classroom management is not much of an issue. You just focus on your teaching content, methodology, and exercises to ensure students learn as much as possible. Here, however, you have to pay more attention to students' emotions, engagement strategies, and their social-emotional needs.] TCTs also struggle with setting clear behavioral expectations, as students in the U.S. require more explicit instructions to follow classroom norms. Han reflected on this challenge: 在课堂管理方面也是，我感觉美国的学生你要给他更加清晰明了的指令，你得告诉他做什 么，否则他就不知道他要干什么什么。你如果不说清楚 123 他就是 456 都能给你弄出来。 [In terms of classroom management, I feel that American students require much clearer and more 62 explicit instructions. You have to tell them exactly what to do, otherwise, they will do something completely unexpected.] Beyond classroom management, many TCTs experience significant emotional labor in managing student engagement and behavior. Unlike in China, where teachers primarily focus on academic content, U.S. schools expect teachers to foster students' social-emotional growth, mediate conflicts, and provide emotional support (De Costa & Nazari, 2024). These responsibilities extend far beyond traditional teaching roles, contributing to emotional exhaustion for teachers unfamiliar with such expectations. Han described his experience handling adolescent behavioral issues, emphasizing how they blurred the boundaries between his professional and personal life: 我第一次接触到这边的初中生，他们的基础是不一样的……他们青春期的行为问题对老师 是一个很大的挑战，导致我没有办法分开个人生活和工作。 [When I first taught middle school students here, their academic foundations were very different... Their adolescent behavioral issues were a major challenge for teachers, making it difficult for me to separate my personal life from work.] The emotional toll of managing students' social-emotional needs was especially apparent during the post-pandemic period, when teachers had to help students transition back to in-person learning. Fang shared how emotionally draining it was to handle students’ intense emotions and outbursts: 我真的很不擅长做学生的这种情绪管理工作，就有的学生抓马，然后又要哭，各种我就觉 得很不知道怎么去处理学生的那种模式，怎么样安慰他。 [I am really not good at handling students’ emotional management. Some students are dramatic, some start crying, and I really don’t know how to deal with those situations or how to comfort them.] 63 Ling similarly recounted her internal struggle with balancing structure and emotional sensitivity in the classroom: 我之前对学生其实是对他们还是比较严格的，因为我觉得你到我的教室你应该保持安静， 你也应该举手，但我没有体谅到学生们的额精神状态……，所以那段时间我真的也很精神 紧张[I used to be quite strict with my students because I believed they should remain quiet and raise their hands in my classroom. But I didn’t take into account their mental state... That period really made me feel very stressed.] The experiences of TCTs reveal how they are exposed to classroom management and student engagement discourses that differ significantly from their experiences in China. They must navigate a landscape where student autonomy, behavioral expectations, and socio- emotional support are prioritized, requiring them to redefine their teaching practices. By incorporating structured routines, explicit instruction, and refined behavior management strategies, TCTs gradually adapt to the complexities of U.S. classrooms. However, this adaptation often comes at an emotional cost, as teachers must balance discipline with student emotional support while managing their own well-being. Given these challenges, there is a need for institutional support and professional development programs that address both pedagogical and emotional challenges. Without these interventions, the emotional labor required in managing student behavior and engagement may contribute to higher burnout rates and difficulty retaining transnational educators in U.S. schools. The challenges TCTs face in navigating classroom management and the emotional labor inherent in the U.S. educational context can be understood here, as mentioned in Chapter 2, through the lens of neoliberal governmentality, in which teachers are constructed as self- regulating individuals responsible for managing not only students' academic success but also 64 their emotional well-being, often without adequate institutional support (Foucault, 1991; Ong, 2006). As TCTs work to align their pedagogical practices with U.S. norms of social-emotional learning and culturally responsive teaching, they are expected to maintain a high level of adaptability and emotional resilience. This dynamic places additional pressure on TCTs to continuously demonstrate their value and effectiveness, contributing to professional stress, emotional exhaustion and burnout. The Discourse of Visa Uncertainty and Family Dilemmas: Between Professional Aspirations and Personal Commitments For most of TCTs, the decision to remain in the U.S. or return to China is shaped by a complex interplay of visa limitations, career stability, and family obligations. Unlike their American-born colleagues, TCTs must navigate a restrictive and unpredictable immigration system, which directly influences their professional and personal decisions (Ghosh & Fouad, 2016). Many experiences constant anxiety regarding their visa status, making long-term planning difficult and affecting their relationships with both colleagues and family members back in China. At the same time, the emotional toll of separation from family forces many TCTs to balance their career ambitions against filial responsibilities to aging parents and cultural expectations (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). The H-1B visa program’s lottery-based selection process introduces an additional layer of uncertainty, making it difficult for TCTs to plan their professional futures with confidence (Yasrebi Law, 2023). Even those who secure sponsorship faces additional stress regarding visa renewals and long-term residency prospects. As discussed in the previous chapter, Ling’s experience with the H-1B lottery exemplifies this uncertainty, but she is far from the only TCT affected by the structural 65 constraints of working in the U.S. Even after securing a work visa, many TCTs remain entirely dependent on their employers for continued sponsorship, severely limiting their job mobility and career progression (Hua, 2019). If a teacher decides to change schools, they must secure a new employer willing to undertake the complex sponsorship process, which many schools are reluctant to do due to administrative burdens and financial costs (Ghosh & Fouad, 2016). Han shared how his visa situation left him in a precarious position after leaving a previous job: 工作签证在我离开的时候，我已经就已经算是没有 sponsor。 [When I left my job, my work visa sponsorship ended as well.] Without an employer-sponsored visa, Han was left with only 60 days to secure another legal status or face deportation: 从我离职的那天开始，我有 60 天的 grace，就在这 60 天我可以如果我没有转换成其他的 身份，我必须要离开美国。[From the day I left my job, I had a 60-day grace period. If I couldn't change to another visa status within those 60 days, I would have to leave the U.S.] Ling has also been deeply concerned about her future career prospects due to the limitations imposed by her immigration status. Although she has obtained a work visa, she faces uncertainty about her long-term stay in the U.S. If she is unable to successfully apply for permanent residency, her work visa is only valid for a maximum of six years, after which she will need to reconsider her career path. What worries her even more is that the school where she is currently employed has never successfully sponsored a Chinese teacher for a green card. This lack of precedent has made her future even more uncertain, leading her to seriously consider leaving her current job in search of an employer with a clearer pathway to permanent residency: 我知道这个这个项目之前有一些非常有经验的老师之所以离开，都是因为学区没能为他们 申请上绿卡。这个学校目前没有绿卡成功的案例，我怎么能一直留在这里呢？ [I know 66 that in the past, some very experienced teachers left our (Chinese-English DLI) program because the school district was unable to secure a green card for them. This school has no successful cases of green card sponsorship—how can I stay here long-term?] Han and Ling’s cases reflect a common dilemma among TCTs: while they may have the skills and qualifications to contribute to U.S. education, their ability to do so is restricted by immigration policies that tie their employment status directly to visa sponsorship. Such instability prevents many from making long-term career plans and adds emotional distress to an already demanding profession (Donnellan & Edmondson, 2018). Beyond job insecurity, visa restrictions also contribute to family separation, adding another layer of emotional burden. The Confucian principle of filial piety emphasizes the responsibility of adult children to care for aging parents, yet staying in the U.S. often means missing major family milestones and being unable to provide direct support (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). Ling reflected on how being away from family allowed her to focus on her career, yet left her feeling socially isolated: 如果首先家人不在身边的话，每天就只能上班，其实这个是一个挺大的帮助，因为你会把 所有的精力都放在做工作上面。 [If family is not around, every day is just work. In some ways, this is helpful because you can dedicate all your energy to your job.] However, she also expressed concerns about missing out on key life moments and struggling to find a sense of belonging in her new environment: 我担心的还是如果在一个比较小的地方能不能交到朋友……一旦你要到新环境的话，大家 都有家有孩子，可能就没有人陪我玩了。[I worry about whether I can make friends in 67 smaller places... Once you enter a new environment, everyone already has families and children, and there might not be anyone to hang out with.] This statement highlights the intersection of professional and personal challenges. While working abroad offers career growth and stability, it also comes at the cost of social support systems that would typically be available in China (Hua, 2019). Many TCTs find themselves living between two worlds, constantly negotiating their sense of belonging in the U.S. while managing familial responsibilities in China (Ghosh & Fouad, 2016). While some TCTs face social isolation due to the absence of family, others make career decisions based on their family’s migration status. Han’s case illustrates how family relocation can influence professional trajectories, demonstrating the constant negotiation between personal and professional considerations: Similarly, Han mentioned that his career decisions were increasingly influenced by his family’s relocation to the U.S., demonstrating the constant negotiation between personal and professional considerations: 我最近在换身份，因为我父母已经移过来了，在暑假的时候，所以我现在是依靠父母（身 份）。 [I am currently switching my visa status because my parents moved to the U.S. this summer, so I am staying based on them.] However, even with family in the U.S., uncertainty about long-term career prospects persists. Han expressed hesitation about pursuing further education, citing concerns about age and time investment: 如果再继续特别是选择一个博士的话，我之前有考虑过，但是现在博士的时间太长。 [I previously considered pursuing a PhD, but now I feel that the time commitment is too long.] 68 For TCTs, the decision to remain in the U.S. or return to China extends beyond career preference—it is deeply shaped by visa restrictions, employment stability, and family obligations (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). Many TCTs aspire to contribute to language education in the U.S., yet their professional mobility is constrained by employer-sponsored visas, making long-term career planning uncertain (Hua, 2019). The dependency on visa sponsorship not only limits job opportunities but also forces TCTs into continuous cycles of legal uncertainty, impacting their financial security and career advancement (Ghosh & Fouad, 2016). Simultaneously, family expectations and cultural obligations exert additional emotional strain, as many TCTs struggle with the Confucian principle of filial piety, which prioritizes caring for aging parents and maintaining close family ties (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). These intersecting pressures complicate decision-making, leading many TCTs to grapple with the trade-offs between professional aspirations and personal commitments. Without policy reforms to provide stable visa pathways, and institutional support to address the unique needs of transnational educators, many TCTs will continue to face significant challenges in securing long-term careers in U.S. schools (Hua, 2019; Ghosh & Fouad, 2016). Discussion of Finding 1 The findings in this chapter illustrate the multiple, intersecting discourses that shape the professional experiences of TCTs in the U.S. educational system. As they navigate their careers, TCTs contend with challenges related to professional legitimacy, cultural and linguistic capital, classroom management, and immigration constraints, all of which influence their professional identities and long-term career aspirations. One of the most persistent struggles for TCTs is the quest for professional legitimacy within U.S. schools. Many TCTs find themselves positioned as assistants rather than independent 69 educators, limiting their ability to establish authority in the classroom and among colleagues (Varghese et al., 2016). This struggle is particularly evident in their interactions with mentor teachers, administrators, and parents, who often perceive them as novices rather than as qualified professionals. As seen in Qin’s case, a lack of institutional support can further exacerbate their exclusion, leading some TCTs to reconsider their long-term place in the profession. Without sufficient backing from school leadership, TCTs must work harder than their native-born colleagues to prove their expertise, and in some cases, this marginalization results in career attrition. At the same time, TCTs' multilingualism and cultural knowledge serve as both an advantage and a challenge. While bilingual educators are often recognized as cultural brokers who enhance student learning and bridge linguistic gaps (Palmer & Martínez, 2013), their expertise is not always institutionally valued. Parents may gravitate toward English-speaking teachers when seeking academic information, reinforcing hierarchical perceptions of linguistic authority (García & Wei, 2014). Furthermore, the absence of curriculum for Chinese instruction places additional labor burdens on TCTs, forcing them to develop their own teaching materials without clear institutional guidance (Chen & Barros, 2022). This paradox of being both celebrated and marginalized underscores the systemic inequities that TCTs must navigate in their professional roles. Another significant challenge TCTs face is adapting to classroom management expectations and emotional labor in U.S. schools. Many teachers report difficulties in transitioning from teacher-centered classroom structures in China to student-centered approaches in the U.S., where teachers are expected to actively manage student engagement and social- emotional needs (De Costa & Nazari, 2024). This shift places additional emotional strain on 70 TCTs, who are not only responsible for academic instruction but also for handling student behavior, navigating disciplinary norms, and fostering student well-being. The emotional toll is particularly pronounced in post-pandemic classrooms, where behavioral issues have intensified, leaving teachers overwhelmed and exhausted. Without clear classroom management support and tailored professional development, many TCTs struggle to adapt to these evolving expectations. Beyond classroom and institutional challenges, visa uncertainty and family obligations further complicate TCTs’ career trajectories. Many transnational teachers are dependent on H-1B visas, which limit job mobility, create employment precarity, and introduce legal uncertainty. Even those who secure sponsorship remains vulnerable to policy changes and employer dependency, making long-term career planning difficult (Hua, 2019). Additionally, the emotional burden of separation from family in China further complicates decision-making for TCTs, who must balance career aspirations with filial responsibilities (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). While some teachers, like Ling, find that being away from family allows them to focus more on work, many also express feelings of social isolation and detachment from cultural support systems. Others, such as Han, must reconfigure their career plans around their family’s migration status, demonstrating the constant negotiation between personal and professional considerations. The findings in this chapter highlight the multiple layers of systemic barriers that TCTs face in their professional journeys. Whether through hierarchical school structures, linguistic biases, pedagogical expectations, or immigration constraints, TCTs must constantly adapt, justify their professional worth, and navigate emotional and bureaucratic complexities. Their experiences illustrate how broader institutional discourses shape professional identities and influence long-term career stability. Recognizing and addressing these challenges is essential for 71 creating an equitable and inclusive teaching environment, where TCTs can fully contribute to and thrive within the U.S. education system. 72 CHAPTER 6: FINDINGS 2: NEGOTIATING PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY AND LANGUAGE IDEOLOGIES IN DUAL-LANGUAGE IMMERSION (DLI) PROGRAMS This chapter presents the findings related to the second research question: How do the dominant discourses shaping TCTs professional experiences in the U.S. influence their professional identity and pedagogical beliefs? The previous chapter examined the institutional, cultural, and structural challenges that shape TCTs professional experiences in the U.S., highlighting issues such as professional legitimacy, classroom management, and visa uncertainty. These discourses not only impact their daily work environment but also shape their evolving professional identities and pedagogical beliefs about language teaching. Teacher identity is not static but constructed through interactions with institutional expectations, students, colleagues, and policy frameworks (Varghese et al., 2016). This chapter examines how TCTs make sense of their professional roles and pedagogical practices as they navigate the ideological and structural tension within the DLI programs and world language classrooms. A key them that emerged from the data is how Chinese language teaching is framed, either as a second language integrated into bilingual education or as a foreign language positioned at the margins of the curriculum. These framing have direct implications how TCTs structure instruction, select curricular materials, and advocate for their subject area (Hornberger & Johnson, 2007; Tedick & Lyster, 2020). Furthermore, the ways in which Chinese language teachers are positioned in DLI programs can reinforce linguistic hierarchies, with English often seen as the dominant language of instruction (Palmer & Martínez, 2013). TCTs, as non-native English speakers, must negotiate their authority and legitimacy as educators within these structures, often working against 73 monoglossic language ideologies that privilege English over bilingual and multilingual practices (García & Wei, 2014). By analyzing interview transcripts, participants’ teaching reflections, and artifacts they have implemented in real teaching settings, this chapter explores how TCTs construct and negotiate their professional identities within institutional and ideological landscapes. It examines how they adapt their pedagogical practices, respond to language policies, and position themselves within the broader educational system. Instructional Authority and Pedagogical Adaptation Many TCTs undergo a significant shift in their teaching philosophy as they move from a teacher-centered model to a student-centered approach. In China, education traditionally emphasizes direct instruction, teacher control, and content mastery, while in the U.S., particularly in DLI programs, teachers are expected to facilitate inquiry-based learning and student engagement (Tedick & Lyster, 2020). This shift challenges TCTs' sense of professional legitimacy, requiring them to redefine their instructional strategies and develop classroom authority within a new pedagogical framework. One of the most significant adjustments for TCTs is establishing classroom authority in a system where teachers are not automatically granted respect. In contrast to the Chinese educational model, where teacher authority is unquestioned, U.S. students expect teachers to earn their respect through engagement and rapport. Many TCTs struggle initially with this cultural shift and have to develop alternative strategies to establish their legitimacy. Cheng reflected on this challenge during her first year of teaching in the U.S., realizing that authority in American classrooms must be built through relationships rather than hierarchy: 74 我发现，在美国，如果学生不信任你，他们就不会听你的话。我的导师告诉我，必须先建 立起和学生的关系，他们才会尊重你。所以我开始在课外花更多的时间和学生交流，结果 发现他们在课堂上对我更尊重了。 [I’ve found that in the U.S., if students don’t trust you, they won’t listen to you. My mentor told me that building relationships with students is essential for gaining their respect. So, I started spending more time interacting with them outside of class, and as a result, I noticed that they showed me more respect in the classroom.] This shift led her to explore structured classroom management systems to help students understand expectations. For example, she shared in her teaching reflection note that she tried to use the “CHAMP” system, which is a rule that tells the students what to expect when doing some classwork. She told them they can read, write, and draw, but they should keep their voice at a certain level. And luckily, it worked well in her classroom. Cheng’s experience reflects a broader pattern among TCTs, who must move beyond a reliance on positional authority and instead develop structured yet relationship-driven management strategies. Another major challenge TCTs face is adapting their instructional methods to a student- centered approach that prioritizes active participation and engagement. In China, students are accustomed to quietly absorbing information, but in the U.S., learning is expected to be interactive, inquiry-driven, and student-led. Ling reflected on her early attempts to replicate Chinese instructional methods and how she had to adapt after realizing that rote learning was ineffective in her new classroom: 刚开始，我让学生像国内一样重复抄写汉字，但他们明显不感兴趣。后来，我开始设计一 些游戏和互动活动，比如角色扮演、分组比赛，发现学生的积极性提高了很多。[At first, I had students repeatedly copy Chinese characters, as is common in China, but they were clearly not interested. Later, I started incorporating games and interactive activities, such as role-playing 75 and group competitions, and I found that their engagement increased significantly.] She further noted the importance of engagement strategies, particularly for younger learners who are easily distracted: "In China, students listen quietly while the teacher explains everything. But in the U.S., I realized that students need to actively participate in order to learn. Now, instead of just explaining grammar rules, I ask them questions and let them discuss before giving my input.” Similarly, Qin described her struggles in moving away from textbook-based instruction to a more interactive and student-driven model: 我以前以为教中文就是按照教材让学生重复单词，但现在我发现，我必须让课堂变得有趣 和互动，这个改变对我来说很难接受，但确实有效。[I used to think that teaching Chinese simply meant having students repeat vocabulary from the textbook. However, I’ve realized that I need to make the classroom more engaging and interactive. This change was difficult for me to accept at first, but it has proven to be effective.] These reflections illustrate how TCTs must restructure their classroom dynamics to prioritize student participation, creativity, and engagement, even when this contradicts their initial training. Comparing Han’s early-career lesson plans to those developed after more than two years of teaching provides a clear example of his pedagogical growth. By analyzing his early-career and later-career lesson plans, we can observe clear shifts in scaffolding techniques, classroom engagement, student-centered instruction, and strategic use of English in an immersion setting. These adaptations reflect his growing confidence in balancing immersion expectations with student comprehension needs while also developing his instructional authority as a DLI educator. In his earlier lessons, Han relied on teacher-centered instruction, where students primarily listened and repeated rather than actively engaging with the material. While he included peer 76 questioning activities, the interactions remained highly structured and controlled by the teacher, limiting students' opportunities for authentic language use. Additionally, the lessons lacked movement-based engagement, making it difficult for students to stay actively involved in learning. Figure 1 Han’s early-career lesson plan teaching geometric shapes By contrast, Han’s later lesson plans incorporated interactive, movement-based learning strategies to improve student engagement and retention. These strategies included: (1)A song- based warm-up to reinforce action verbs, and (2) Whole-class dialogue activities where students took turns asking and answering questions in a rotating sequence, promoting meaningful 77 communication and interaction. These changes reflect Han’s shift from passive language recall to interactive, communicative learning, reinforcing students’ conversational abilities while maintaining an immersion environment (Tedick & Lyster, 2020). Another major adaptation was Han’s use of scaffolding techniques to ensure students could acquire language effectively. Initially, Han’s classroom management approach was rigid, with students working independently on worksheets and rote memorization tasks. These lessons lacked differentiation, meaning that students who struggled received little individualized support, while those who mastered the material had no opportunities for enrichment. In his later lesson plans, however, Han incorporated differentiated instruction and embedded formative assessment techniques, ensuring that students at different proficiency levels received appropriate support. Examples include Thumbs-up/down to assess comprehension before moving forward; Bingo and sentence search activities to reinforce vocabulary in an engaging format; and guided reading with targeted questioning to help struggling students while allowing advanced learners to expand their language use. These adaptations demonstrate Han’s increasing ability to manage classroom behavior while ensuring language input remains meaningful and accessible (De Costa & Nazari, 2024). 78 Figure 2 Han’s later-career lesson plan, teaching action words Han’s instructional adaptations illustrate how TCTs negotiate their classroom authority and refine their teaching practices to better align with student learning needs. His shift from rigid instruction to scaffolded, interactive learning demonstrates his growth as an educator and reflects the broader challenges TCTs face in navigating immersion policies. Another example of TCTs’ adaptation of pedagogical strategies is the implementation of differentiated instruction (DI) to meet the diverse needs of students. In Cheng’s DI lesson plan, she differentiated the products of the lesson by providing multiple ways for students to demonstrate their learning, a key principle of DI (Tomlinson, 2014). Students engage in a tiered recall game where they earn varying points based on their ability to recognize, say, or write new vocabulary words. This approach aligns with differentiated product strategies, allowing students to demonstrate their understanding at different levels of proficiency: "Students who can find the correct words from the flashcards in their hands can earn two dojo points. Students who can remember those words by themselves and say them out loud 79 correctly can earn four dojo points. Students who can write down those words on their board and read them correctly can earn six dojo points" Cheng reflected on the importance of differentiation, acknowledging that her students had varying proficiency levels, with one being a native speaker and another having special needs. She recognized the necessity of matching instructional complexity to students’ readiness: "It is crucial to match the complexity of a task to the student’s current level of language proficiency. Therefore, I differentiate the process by encouraging them to use different methods, which range from easy to difficult, in order to recall the new words." Additionally, Cheng highlighted the role of formative assessment in guiding her instructional decisions, ensuring that differentiation remained dynamic and responsive to student needs. Through this reflection, she demonstrated a shift in teaching philosophy, moving from a rigid instructional approach to one that prioritized adaptability, student engagement, and evidence-based assessment (Tomlinson, 2017). This evolution underscores the transformative impact of differentiated instructions on TCTs’ pedagogical beliefs and practices. The experiences of TCTs in U.S. classrooms highlight the complex interplay between instructional authority and pedagogical adaptation. Initially trained in teacher-centered models that emphasize direct instruction and rigid authority structures, many TCTs find themselves challenged to establish legitimacy in classrooms that prioritize student autonomy, engagement, and inquiry-based learning. This necessitates a significant shift in their teaching philosophy and classroom management strategies. A critical aspect of this transition is the understanding that classroom authority in the U.S. is often built through the development of positive teacher-student relationships rather than through hierarchical structures. Research indicates that strong teacher-student rapport can lead to 80 increased student engagement and academic success (Xie & Derakhshan, 2021). This shift requires TCTs to adopt more relational approaches, focusing on building trust and mutual respect to foster a conducive learning environment. Moreover, the move from rote memorization to interactive, student-centered learning approaches is essential for TCTs adapting to U.S. educational contexts. Studies have shown that student-centered classrooms, where learners actively participate and engage with the material, can enhance critical thinking and retention (Garrett, 2008). This pedagogical shift involves incorporating scaffolding techniques and differentiated instruction to support diverse learners effectively. Implementing scaffolding strategies is particularly crucial in supporting second language learners within immersion programs. Scaffolding provides the necessary support structures that enable students to achieve higher levels of understanding and skill acquisition. Research emphasizes that systematic scaffolding techniques can significantly enhance literacy acquisition among second language learners (Gibbons, 2015). For TCTs, this means designing lessons that build on students' existing knowledge while gradually introducing more complex language concepts, thereby facilitating effective language development without compromising immersion principles. These adaptations not only improve classroom management and student learning outcomes but also contribute to the redefinition of TCTs' professional identities. As they develop confidence and flexibility in their instructional methods, TCTs transition from educators rooted in traditional, teacher-centered paradigms to facilitators of dynamic, student-centered learning environments. This evolution reflects a broader trend in transnational teacher acculturation, where educators navigate both linguistic and cultural shifts to succeed in new educational landscapes. While this process presents challenges, it ultimately empowers TCTs to become 81 more effective educators, capable of bridging diverse educational philosophies and enhancing bilingual education for their students. Tensions in Dual-Language Immersion: Monoglossic Language Policy vs. Translanguaging Practices Many TCTs report experiencing tensions between institutional language policies, their beliefs about effective language education, and the realities of classroom practice. A key challenge for TCTs is the expectation to maintain at least 90% target-language input, a requirement set by the American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL, 2010) and widely implemented across foreign language programs in the U.S. (Chen & Barros, 2022). This policy places significant pressure on TCTs to sustain instruction in Chinese regardless of students' proficiency levels. Many TCTs initially struggle to balance immersion requirements with student comprehension, leading to difficulties in classroom management and instructional effectiveness. While institutional policies emphasize rigid language separation, students naturally engage in translanguaging as a meaning-making strategy, using both Chinese and English to comprehend and express their ideas. This ideological conflict puts TCTs in a challenging position, forcing them to choose between adhering to monoglossic immersion principles or adopting flexible bilingual strategies to enhance student comprehension and engagement. DLI programs in the U.S. have largely adopted monoglossic language ideologies, which treat Chinese and English as separate, bounded systems that should not mix during instruction (Sung & Tsai, 2019). The expectation is that language separation strengthens immersion, allowing students to develop native-like proficiency in the target language without interference from English. 82 However, this policy often ignores the reality that bilingual speakers naturally blend their linguistic resources to facilitate learning (García & Wei, 2014). Several TCTs reported experiencing a “dark period” of frustration as they attempted to meet institutional expectations while maintaining student engagement and lesson clarity. Many struggled with the reality that students’ lack of comprehension led to disengagement and behavioral disruptions, yet using English to scaffold learning was perceived as a violation of immersion principles. Ling reflected on her first year as a teacher of record, highlighting the difficulties of balancing immersion-based teaching strategies with students’ comprehension needs: “I found that my students did not understand my Chinese instructions, which made it easy for them to lose focus. So, I tried supplementing key instructions with English.” Similarly, Cheng recognized the limitations of a strict immersion approach, noting that structured scaffolding was necessary to ensure students could gradually acquire the language: “First, I realized that all of my instructions were in Chinese, and this was too much for them. They did not understand what I said and did not know what to do, therefore, they lost their attention and did something else. Therefore, I will try to explain one time in English after giving Chinese instructions to ensure they know what I am saying and focus on learning.” Later, she experimented with instructional strategies to support comprehension while maintaining immersion principles: “Their Chinese proficiency is not high enough to understand completely, so I have to use the 'I do – We do – You do' method to help them acquire the skills gradually.” In addition to comprehension challenges, TCTs also reported that strict language separation policies impacted classroom management. Han described how students, recognizing their parents' inability to monitor their Chinese learning, would deliberately misbehave in class: 83 他们觉得反正听不懂，家长也听不懂，就可以在课堂上胡闹。 [Since they don’t understand anyway, and their parents won’t understand either, they think they can just mess around in Chinese class.] These reflections illustrate how TCTs initially struggled to assert instructional authority within the constraints of DLI immersion policies, as students' lack of comprehension often led to behavioral disruptions and disengagement. As TCTs gained experience, they began adjusting their instructional approaches to better support student learning while still adhering to institutional expectations for high target-language input. Through reflection, professional development, and classroom experimentation, TCTs integrated scaffolding techniques, engagement strategies, and differentiated instruction to balance immersion policies with classroom realities. Han, for example, made significant progress in his instructional language strategies. Initially, he adhered to a strict 100% Chinese immersion approach, avoiding any use of English for clarification (see Figure 1). However, this method often led to student confusion and disengagement, particularly when students struggled to comprehend key instructions. Recognizing this challenge, Han gradually adopted a more strategic use of English for scaffolding in his later lesson plans. This adjustment allowed students to better follow complex instructions while still maintaining the immersion model. Han ensured that English was used only as a temporary support mechanism, rather than a primary instructional language. This strategic shift aligns with research on scaffolded immersion models, which suggests that allowing limited L1 use can actually enhance target-language acquisition without compromising immersion goals (Turnbull & Dailey-O’Cain, 2009). 84 One example from Han’s classroom highlights his evolving approach: In one lesson, students struggled to differentiate animal action verbs (飞 – fly, 游 – swim, 跑 – run). Instead of continuing in pure Chinese, Han momentarily used English to reinforce meanings before returning to full Chinese instruction and used body movements to help students comprehend the content, and explicit modeling: “飞 means fly, like this (flaps arms). Now let’s say it in Chinese together.” Figure 3 Han’s later-career lesson plan, teaching action words As TCTs refined their instructional strategies, students also began engaging in natural translanguaging practices, using both English and Chinese to navigate learning. While teachers used strategic scaffolding to enhance clarity and engagement, students instinctively leveraged both languages to process new concepts. This shift highlights how translanguaging is not merely a teacher-directed strategy but also a cognitive tool that bilingual students actively use to make sense of their learning experiences. Ling also shared an example of how her students utilized both English and Chinese in a math lesson on a math class, demonstrating translanguaging as a tool for meaning making. In her instruction, Ling introduced mathematical terminologies such as acute angle (锐角), obtuse angle (钝角), and right angle (直角)in Chinese, explaining not only 85 their definitions and pronunciations but also how these terms are written in Chinese characters. This approach was intended to immerse students in subject-specific vocabulary while reinforcing their Chinese literacy skills. However, when students worked on their math worksheets, they instinctively relied on English equivalents to reinforce their comprehension. While they wrote the angle classifications in Chinese, many also annotated their work with English terms, using both languages as complementary cognitive resources to process the lesson content. This translanguaging practice highlights how bilingual students naturally draw on their full linguistic repertoire to navigate mathematical concepts in a DLI environment. 86 Figure 4 Ling’s math worksheet 1, teaching mathematical terminologies This example illustrates that strict language separation in immersion settings may not reflect the actual learning needs of students. Rather than impeding language acquisition, translanguaging allows students to strengthen their conceptual understanding by leveraging both their languages. By integrating Chinese terminology into math instruction while allowing 87 students to cross-reference with English, Ling’s approach supports both content mastery and bilingual proficiency. This aligns with research suggesting that bilingual learners benefit from translanguaging as a scaffold for acquiring complex academic knowledge (García & Lin, 2016). This transformation highlights a key aspect of professional identity development—TCTs do not passively implement DLI policies, but rather actively shape their instructional practices to support bilingual learning effectively. As they gain experience and confidence, TCTs assert their instructional authority by making pedagogically sound decisions rather than strictly adhering to policy mandates. These findings align with Chen and Barros (2022), who emphasize that DLI educators must engage in ongoing reflection and adaptation to balance institutional demands with students' linguistic realities. By leveraging translanguaging as a pedagogical tool, TCTs challenge monoglossic ideologies and position themselves as instructional innovators in bilingual education. Institutional Constraints and the Framing of Chinese as a Second or Foreign Language One of the central challenges TCTs face in the U.S. educational system is how their subject expertise—Chinese language and culture—is institutionally positioned and valued. Unlike widely taught world languages such as Spanish, which often benefit from established curricular frameworks, national standards, and structured assessment models, Chinese language education in the U.S. remains fragmented, inconsistently supported, and lacking a unified research-based curricular foundation. This lack of standardization affects not only what and how TCTs teach but also how Chinese is framed within the curriculum—either as a second language (L2) integrated into students’ broader linguistic repertoire or as a foreign language with limited real-world application. 88 The absence of a unified, research-based curricular framework in Chinese language education presents one of the most pressing challenges for TCTs. While some schools adopt commercial textbooks, many educators find these materials inadequate, outdated, or misaligned with their instructional goals. The burden of curriculum development thus falls on individual teachers, requiring them to design and adapt their own teaching materials without institutional support. Cheng highlighted this issue: 我们学校并没有固定的教材，我们自己找。我现在用的是比较杂，有一个叫《快乐幼儿华 语》，里面有一些很简单的书，还有幼儿美猴王汉语，但是没有一个真正成体系的教材。 [Our school does not have a fixed curriculum; we find materials ourselves. Right now, I use a mix of different books, such as Happy Chinese for Young Learners and Monkey King Chinese, but there is no cohesive curriculum.] Even in schools that adopt a structured pedagogical philosophy like IB, TCTs still struggle to align their instruction with broader educational goals and interdisciplinary frameworks: 学校对你教啥并没有什么规定，但希望你多用中文，然后多用 IB 的理念["The school does not have specific requirements on what to teach, but they expect you to use Chinese more and incorporate IB concepts.] Due to the lack of structured curricular support, TCTs often take on the role of curriculum developers, adapting materials to align with their pedagogical beliefs. This act of curriculum-building represents a strategic effort to convert their embodied cultural capital (linguistic expertise) into institutional capital （recognized educational materials） (Bourdieu, 1986). Qin described this shift as a necessary adaptation to U.S. classroom expectations: 89 在国内，教材是教学的核心。但在美国，我发现学生更需要互动和动手的机会，所以我开 始自己设计项目式学习活动。 [In China, textbooks are the core of teaching. However, in the U.S., I found that students need more interaction and hands-on opportunities, so I started designing project-based learning activities myself.] This lack of structured curricular support places Chinese in a precarious institutional position, reinforcing the perception of it as an isolated subject rather than a living, socially embedded language (García & Lin, 2016). Without a clear framework, TCTs must not only teach the language but also construct its legitimacy as an academic discipline, further reinforcing their marginalized status within the broader educational system. Additionally, Han expressed frustration over the lack of alignment between curriculum and assessment, which forces teachers to design their own instructional materials while adhering to assessment systems primarily designed for English-language instruction: 我们没有固定的中文教材，评估体系还是按照英语的模式来走，这让我必须自己去设计课 程，确保学生既能达到学校的要求，又能学好中文。 [We don’t have a set Chinese curriculum, but the assessment system still follows the English model. This forces me to design my own lessons to ensure students meet school expectations while also learning Chinese.] Beyond the challenge of curricular inconsistency, TCTs also face significant gaps in assessment structures for Chinese language learners. Unlike English as a Second Language (ESL) programs, which benefit from nationally recognized assessment frameworks such as WIDA, Chinese language education lacks formalized evaluation tools to measure student proficiency at the K-12 level. Although standardized assessments such as the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) and STAMP (Standards-Based Measurement of Proficiency) exist, they are not widely implemented in many schools. As a result, TCTs must develop their own 90 assessment strategies to track student progress and align instruction with learning outcomes. Ling and Cheng actively adopted Integrated Performance Assessment (IPA), a performance- based evaluation model that emphasizes interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational skills, allowing educators to assess students’ ability to use Chinese in real-world contexts (Adair- Hauck, Glisan, & Troyan, 2013). As Ling reflected: “Before learning IPA mode, I used more formative assessments and summative assessments. After exposure to IPA, I realized that this mode can well assess students' oral Chinese level, and through the assessment, it can also prepare for the next stage of learning Chinese.” Rather than treating Chinese as a purely academic language, Ling designed assessments that engaged students in real-world linguistic tasks, such as: Conducting interviews with native speakers in the community; Using authentic materials like restaurant menus or online shopping pages; Implementing task-based activities to foster both linguistic and cultural competence. For example, in her unit “Clean Up the River”, Ling designed a week-long lesson culminating in an IPA aligned with ACTFL’s three communicative modes. In the absence of standardized assessments for Chinese language learners, Ling used interpretive reading, interpersonal discussion, and presentational writing tasks to evaluate students’ real-world use of language, integrating both content and linguistic objectives 91 Figure 5 Ling’s IPA template Similarly, Cheng incorporated IPA-based assessments, moving beyond traditional written exams to evaluate students’ holistic language skills: “I wanted students to understand that Chinese isn’t just a subject in school, but a language they can use to communicate. I had them visit Chinese supermarkets and restaurants to ask questions in Chinese, and they learned much faster.” In her “Ordering Food in Chinese Restaurants” unit, Cheng designed IPA tasks that required students to engage in simulated real-world communication, such as conducting interviews about Chinese 92 cuisine, performing role plays, and designing authentic restaurant menus. These activities emphasized communicative competence and cultural application, aligning with her stated goal of helping students use Chinese as a living language beyond the classroom. Figure 6 Cheng’s IPA template Although TCTs have voiced concerns and challenges regarding the integration of IPA in certain classroom settings (Chen & Gu, 2024), their continued adaptation of the framework 93 demonstrates a strong commitment to fostering authentic language learning experiences. By developing innovative curricular materials and assessment tools, TCTs actively reshape how Chinese is positioned in the U.S. educational system—resisting its status as a marginal foreign language and repositioning it as a dynamic and interactive means of communication. In the absence of standardized curricula and assessment frameworks, many TCTs take initiative by forming professional learning communities that collaboratively design instructional materials and refine curriculum alignment. These teacher-led networks operate as grassroots curriculum development teams, enabling educators to share best practices, co-create resources, and collectively advocate for greater institutional support. Reflecting the early emergence of what Wenger (1998) conceptualizes as Communities of Practice, these networks are grounded in shared goals, mutual engagement, and collaborative meaning-making. For example, Cheng described how her school’s Chinese instructional team addresses curricular and assessment gaps: 我们现在有一个中文教学指导，她会 K-12 负责中文组的教学。K-8 有一套体系，但我们 Pre-K 没有，所以我们大概跟着 K 走。中文老师每个月开一次会，大家会讨论教学策略、 学生的输出，以及怎么让学生更感兴趣。 [We now have a Chinese instructional coach who oversees K-12 instruction. K-8 has a structured framework, but Pre-K does not, so we generally follow the K framework. Chinese teachers meet once a month to discuss teaching strategies, student output, and ways to make learning more engaging.] Similarly, Ling, who relocated to a mountainous state with a small immigrant population and limited Asian student presence, found a strong professional community in her school’s DLI program. Despite the demographic context, the school had established a dedicated team of Chinese teachers who met quarterly to support one another in navigating the specific challenges of DLI instruction. Ling shared that their meetings focused on instructional planning, monitoring 94 student proficiency levels, and refining teaching materials to align with both language acquisition goals and academic content standards. One example of Ling’s curricular work involved a cultural learning project in which students created a festive artifact using decorated cardboard. Students selected and applied Chinese characters such as “福” (blessing), “富” (wealth), and “好运” (good luck) to celebrate the Chinese New Year, integrating language development with creative expression and cultural exploration. 95 Figure 7 Chinese snake created by students using decorated cardboard boxes to celebrate Chinese New Year Through participation in these teacher-driven professional learning communities, TCTs engage in a form of institutional advocacy. They convert their embodied cultural capital, including linguistic expertise, pedagogical knowledge, and cultural fluency, into institutionalized 96 resources such as curriculum frameworks, assessment models, and professional development initiatives (Bourdieu, 1986). This process is particularly crucial in reinforcing the legitimacy of Chinese as an academic subject, especially in school contexts where Chinese programs often lack the structural support afforded to more established world languages like Spanish or French. Moreover, these professional networks serve as a critical space for TCTs to cultivate collective agency, strengthening their standing within schools where they may initially face challenges in gaining recognition as authoritative educators (Duff, 2008). In this context, agency refers to TCTs’ capacity to make purposeful decisions and take intentional actions to shape their professional roles, challenge institutional constraints, and advocate for their students and subject area (Priestley et al., 2015). Rather than passively accepting the marginal status often assigned to Chinese language education, TCTs actively reframe and reposition Chinese as a vibrant, relevant, and academically rigorous discipline. These collaborative efforts deepen TCTs’ professional agency and reinforce their shared identity as educators, aligning with Wenger’s (1998) conception of Communities of Practice as spaces where practice, identity, and meaning co-evolve. Discussion for Finding 2 The findings presented in this chapter highlight the complex ways in which transnational TCTs negotiate their professional identities and belief of language teaching within DLI programs. TCTs' professional identities are continuously shaped by ideological, structural, and policy-driven constraints, requiring them to redefine their instructional authority within the U.S. education system (Varghese et al., 2016). Institutional expectations regarding strict monoglossic immersion, classroom authority, and instructional methods directly influence how TCTs perceive their roles as educators. Unlike in China, where teachers hold inherent authority, TCTs in the 97 U.S. must actively establish legitimacy through student engagement, pedagogical adaptation, and professional networking. This shift in teaching philosophy—from teacher-centered to student- centered instruction—reflects the extent to which institutional discourses influence their evolving beliefs about education and classroom management (Tedick & Lyster, 2020). A key factor in shaping TCTs’ beliefs about language teaching is the way Chinese is framed within DLI programs. While some institutions integrate Chinese as a second language within a bilingual education framework, others position it as a foreign language with limited institutional recognition. This framing affects curriculum development, instructional expectations, and students’ linguistic positioning—ultimately influencing whether Chinese functions as an accessible language of communication or remains a marginalized academic subject (Hornberger & Johnson, 2007). Moreover, the absence of a standardized curriculum and established assessment frameworks often requires TCTs to develop their own instructional materials while navigating institutional expectations rooted in English-dominant assessment models (Duff & Lester, 2008). Moreover, TCTs must navigate the tensions between policy-driven language separation and students' natural translanguaging practices. While DLI policies often mandate 90% or more target-language input, students instinctively engage in translanguaging strategies to process content, bridge linguistic gaps, and deepen comprehension (García & Lin, 2016). This disconnects between monoglossic policy and learning realities forces TCTs to make pedagogical decisions that challenge strict language separation while maintaining the integrity of immersion instruction (Sung & Tsai, 2019). Over time, many TCTs redefine their instructional approaches, strategically integrating scaffolding techniques, translanguaging, and formative assessments such as IPA to support both language acquisition and content mastery (Chen & Gu, 2024). 98 Lastly, the institutional precarity of Chinese language education, including a lack of standardized curricula, limited professional development opportunities, and visa-related job instability, further shapes how TCTs view their professional trajectories. Many take on the additional role of curriculum developers, advocate for the legitimacy of their subject, and form professional learning communities to address the structural gaps that position Chinese as an undervalued language in U.S. education (García & Lin, 2016). To conclude, this chapter demonstrates that TCTs are not passive implementers of DLI policies but active negotiators of their professional roles and language ideologies. Their pedagogical adaptations, classroom innovations, and strategic engagement with translanguaging reflect a broader struggle to position Chinese as a dynamic, socially embedded language rather than a foreign, peripheral subject. By continuously adapting to institutional constraints while asserting their instructional authority, TCTs play a crucial role in shaping the future of Chinese DLI programs and challenging monoglossic ideologies that restrict bilingual learning (Palmer & Martínez, 2013). 99 CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS This chapter synthesizes the findings from the study, discussing their broader implications for the professional identities and pedagogical beliefs of TCTs in DLI programs. By exploring the ways in which institutional discourses, language ideologies, and structural constraints shape TCTs’ professional experiences, this study highlights the challenges they face in establishing legitimacy, navigating language policies, and adapting to new instructional expectations. This chapter also outlines implications for educational policy, teacher training, and institutional support to ensure that TCTs are better integrated into U.S. schools. Discussion Professional Identity as a Continuous Negotiation The findings illustrate that TCTs' professional legitimacy is not automatically granted in U.S. schools but is instead shaped by institutional structures, mentor-teacher relationships, and student perceptions. Many TCTs initially struggle to establish authority in their classrooms, particularly when they are positioned as assistants rather than lead educators, reinforcing a subordinate professional status (Varghese et al., 2016). This struggle for professional recognition extends beyond student interactions to colleague and administrator perceptions, requiring TCTs to continually assert their qualifications and expertise to be viewed as full members of the teaching faculty. This challenge is further compounded by linguistic hierarchies in DLI programs, where English remains the dominant language of power. While TCTs' bilingual skills and cultural knowledge are acknowledged as valuable, they are simultaneously devalued in professional interactions. Parents often defer to English-speaking teachers for academic concerns, reinforcing the perception that Chinese instructors are secondary to their English counterparts (Palmer & 100 Martínez, 2013). This paradox that being valued for multilingual abilities yet excluded from decision-making and institutional leadership illustrates the ongoing marginalization of TCTs within school hierarchies. The need to assert legitimacy and authority also influences how TCTs design their classroom practices, as they must balance maintaining discipline, engaging students, and demonstrating expertise in an educational system that does not always recognize their professional status. The transition from a teacher-centered approach in China to a student- centered model in the U.S. requires not only pedagogical adaptation but also a reconfiguration of professional identity, where authority is established through engagement, relationship-building, and instructional effectiveness rather than hierarchical status (Tedick & Lyster, 2020). Additionally, institutional constraints such as visa dependency further complicate TCTs’ professional trajectories. Many TCTs rely on employer-sponsored visas, which limit job mobility and long-term career planning (Hua, 2019). This precarious status prevents many TCTs from advancing into leadership positions, as career progression is often dependent on immigration sponsorship rather than professional merit. Visa restrictions not only affect professional agency but also increase emotional stress, as many TCTs must navigate the intersection of career insecurity and family obligations, reinforcing the broader structural inequities that transnational educators face (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). These findings underscore the transnational negotiation of professional identity, where TCTs must operate across multiple educational paradigms, drawing on their experiences in China while adapting to the ideological and structural expectations of U.S. classrooms. Their professional identities are fluid and evolving, shaped by institutional discourses, peer 101 interactions, and classroom realities. This adaptation process demonstrates TCTs’ agency in redefining their roles within the constraints of the educational system. Navigating Monoglossic Policies and Translanguaging Practices One of the most significant tensions TCTs navigate is the disconnect between institutional language policies and the linguistic realities of bilingual learners. Many DLI programs enforce strict language separation policies, requiring that Chinese be used at least 90% of the time in the classroom (ACTFL, 2010). These policies are based on monoglossic ideologies that treat Chinese and English as separate, bounded systems, assuming that strict immersion strengthens language acquisition (Sung & Tsai, 2019). However, the findings of this study suggest that these policies do not align with students’ actual learning practices, as students naturally engage in translanguaging to process content and bridge linguistic gaps (García & Lin, 2016). This shift in teaching strategies reflects a broader negotiation of language ideologies, as TCTs challenge rigid language separation models and advocate for more flexible bilingual approaches. In subjects like mathematics, where students must grasp abstract concepts, teachers often allow them to use English and Chinese side by side, incorporating bilingual annotations, peer discussions, and scaffolded English support to facilitate deeper understanding. The integration of translanguaging into content instruction does not weaken immersion programs but rather strengthens students’ ability to apply their bilingual skills in academic settings (García & Wei, 2014). The findings underscore the need for a shift in DLI policy discourse, moving away from rigid monoglossic expectations toward evidence-based bilingual education models that recognize the cognitive and academic benefits of translanguaging. Schools must reconsider how language policies are implemented, ensuring that teachers have the flexibility to use bilingual scaffolding strategies without violating institutional mandates. 102 Structural Marginalization of Chinese Language Education Another major theme across both findings is the lack of standardized curricula and institutional support for Chinese language instruction, which places additional labor burdens on TCTs. Unlike Spanish or French programs, which benefit from established curricular frameworks and assessment structures, Chinese language educators must develop their own materials with little institutional guidance (Chen & Barros, 2022). The findings indicate that TCTs frequently engage in grassroots curriculum development, forming professional learning communities to collaborate on lesson planning and instructional strategies. While these teacher- driven initiatives demonstrate professional agency, they also highlight systemic inequities in how Chinese language programs are supported. The absence of structured curricular resources reinforces the perception of Chinese as a peripheral subject, requiring TCTs to constantly advocate for their subject’s legitimacy while simultaneously managing curriculum development, assessment planning, and instructional delivery. The lack of structured institutional support devalues TCTs' expertise, making it more difficult for them to assert their professional status and secure long-term career stability (Bourdieu, 1986). Unlike their English-speaking colleagues, who often work within structured curricular models, TCTs must justify their instructional approaches while simultaneously developing the materials to sustain them. This dual burden— pedagogical labor and advocacy for legitimacy—positions Chinese language education in a continuous state of precarity, dependent on individual teacher efforts rather than systemic support. Implications This study examined the professional experiences of TCTs in Chinese-English DLI programs, focusing on how institutional discourses, language ideologies, and structural 103 constraints shaped their pedagogical beliefs and instructional practices. The findings illustrate that TCTs must continuously negotiate their professional identities, navigate monoglossic language policies, and advocate for the legitimacy of Chinese language instruction within an English-dominant educational system. While the experiences of the TCTs in this study cannot be generalized to all Chinese language teachers in the U.S., they provide valuable insights into the broader challenges faced by transnational educators working in DLI programs (Cardozo- Gaibisso et al., 2017). These findings contribute to the ongoing discussion on how transnational teachers manage the tensions between language policies, professional legitimacy, and instructional adaptation (Cammarata & Tedick, 2012). The implications of this study highlight the need for educational policy reforms, institutional support, and professional development initiatives to improve the sustainability of Chinese DLI programs. The discussion in this chapter emphasizes the necessity of shifting from rigid monolingual instructional models to more flexible, research-based bilingual education frameworks, ensuring that TCTs are supported in their instructional decisions and career trajectories. The findings call for a reconceptualization of language policies, teacher training, and employment policies to create a more equitable and sustainable working environment for Chinese language educators. Educational Policy, Language Instruction, and Teacher Preparation The current study underscores the need for more flexible language policies in DLI programs, particularly regarding the strict language separation policies that often conflict with students’ natural bilingual practices. While many programs enforce a 90% target-language requirement (ACTFL, 2010), this study, alongside existing research, demonstrates that students benefit from translanguaging strategies that allow them to use their full linguistic repertoires to 104 facilitate comprehension and content learning (García & Lin, 2016). The institutional expectation that TCTs enforce monolingual instruction places pedagogical constraints on teachers, forcing them to choose between adhering to policy or addressing student learning needs more effectively. Instead of viewing translanguaging as a threat to immersion, policymakers should reconsider how language policies are framed and implemented, ensuring that teachers have the flexibility to incorporate bilingual scaffolding techniques (García & Wei, 2014). At the same time, these policy constraints reflect deeper systemic issues tied to linguicism, the ideological privileging of dominant language norms (e.g., native-like English) and the marginalization of other linguistic identities (Flores & Rosa, 2015). For instance, Han was criticized for briefly using English to clarify content, despite evidence that bilingual scaffolding supported his students' understanding. This moment illustrates how language ideologies are embedded in institutional expectations, shaping not only student access but also how TCTs’ pedagogical decisions are judged and regulated. Naming linguicism as a structural barrier highlights the ways in which TCTs must constantly navigate deficit discourses that frame them—and their linguistic practices—as less legitimate. Additionally, the study highlights the lack of standardized curricula and assessment frameworks for Chinese language instruction, requiring TCTs to develop their own materials with minimal institutional support (Chen & Barros, 2022). Unlike Spanish and French programs, which benefit from national curricular frameworks, Chinese DLI programs often lack clear instructional guidelines and resources, placing additional labor burdens on teachers. This structural gap reinforces the marginalization of Chinese as an academic subject and devalues the expertise of Chinese language educators. To address this, national and state education policymakers should invest in developing standardized curricular frameworks and assessment 105 tools for Chinese language education, ensuring that TCTs have access to high-quality instructional materials that align with world language standards. Furthermore, the findings suggest that teacher training programs should integrate explicit instructional strategies, including translanguaging pedagogy and differentiated instruction for dual-language learners. Many TCTs enter U.S. schools without sufficient training in student- centered pedagogies, formative assessment, and content-based language instruction (Varghese et al., 2016). The assumption that bilingual teachers will simply “figure it out” through experience places undue pressure on educators and delays instructional effectiveness. Providing targeted professional development on best practices for bilingual education can better prepare TCTs for the realities of teaching in U.S. immersion programs, ensuring that language and content instruction are integrated effectively. By addressing both policy-level constraints and pedagogical preparation, this study advocates for a more coherent and equity-oriented approach to preparing and supporting Chinese language teachers. Expanding the focus of teacher education to include critical language awareness, structural analysis of power, and the affirmation of transnational identities is essential for improving the long-term viability and justice-oriented impact of DLI programs in the U.S. Institutional Support for TCTS and Teacher Retention The findings of this study also emphasize the critical role of institutional support in TCTs’ professional success and retention. School leadership plays a significant role in shaping teachers’ experiences, particularly for transnational educators who are navigating both cultural and pedagogical transitions. Research has shown that teacher retention is closely linked to school leadership practices, administrative support, and opportunities for professional growth (Mancuso 106 et al., 2011). When school administrators advocate for and support TCTs, it improves teacher satisfaction, instructional quality, and long-term retention. One pressing issue affecting TCT retention is the precarity of their employment status due to visa restrictions. Many TCTs rely on employer-sponsored visas, which limit job mobility, financial security, and career advancement. Visa dependency prevents TCTs from pursuing leadership positions, as their employment status is tied to specific teaching roles rather than broader educational opportunities. This situation not only affects individual career trajectories but also undermines the long-term sustainability of DLI programs, as skilled educators may be forced to leave due to immigration constraints rather than professional capabilities (Carver- Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). Research indicates that immigration barriers contribute to higher teacher turnover rates, particularly in bilingual and world language programs, leading to disruptions in student learning and instructional continuity (Gándara & Mordechay, 2017). To improve retention rates and support TCTs' professional stability, schools and educational policymakers should advocate for more accessible visa pathways and permanent residency options for bilingual educators. Schools that depend on TCTs to sustain DLI programs should provide institutional support for green card applications, ensuring that educators can build stable, long-term careers without the constant uncertainty of visa renewals. Without policy changes, the field risks losing highly qualified bilingual educators who are unable to remain in the profession due to immigration barriers rather than teaching ability (Carver-Thomas, 2018). Finally, addressing the emotional and social challenges of transnational educators is essential for their long-term retention and professional satisfaction. Schools should offer cultural orientation programs and social integration initiatives to help TCTs adjust to both the professional and personal aspects of working in a new country. Providing community 107 engagement opportunities and peer support networks can help reduce feelings of isolation, ultimately contributing to higher retention rates and more effective bilingual education programs (Gist et al., 2019). Professional Reflection and Empowerment for Transnational Teachers Beyond informing policy and institutional change, this study also holds significance for transnational educators themselves. By documenting and analyzing the lived experiences of TCTs in U.S. DLI programs, the study offers a reflective mirror through which educators can better understand their own professional trajectories, identity negotiations, and adaptive strategies. Many participants in this study expressed uncertainty, self-doubt, or isolation in their early years of teaching, feelings that may be common yet underdiscussed among transnational teachers. Sharing these narratives not only validates those experiences but also helps build a sense of solidarity and professional community. Furthermore, the study highlights the agency and resourcefulness that TCTs demonstrate in adapting to new instructional models, building cross-cultural relationships, and advocating for bilingual students. These insights can empower other transnational educators to recognize their strengths, leverage their cultural capital, and make informed pedagogical choices in ways that affirm both their students' and their own multilingual identities. 108 CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS This dissertation explored the experiences of TCTs working in the U.S. education system, focusing on the discourses that shape their professional identities, instructional practices, and career trajectories. Drawing on data from semi-structured interviews, teaching reflections, and classroom artifacts, this study identified key challenges faced by TCTs, including issues of professional legitimacy, language policy tensions, institutional constraints, and visa-related job insecurity. Through the lens of transnationalism theory, cultural capital theory, and neoliberal governmentality, this study examined how broader discourses intersect with TCTs’ daily teaching experiences and their evolving pedagogical beliefs. The findings of this study underscore the precarious positioning of TCTs within the U.S. education system. While they bring valuable linguistic and cultural expertise, their professional legitimacy is often questioned due to hierarchical school structures, linguistic biases, and a lack of institutional support. Many TCTs must actively negotiate their authority in the classroom, challenging dominant discourses that position them as instructional assistants rather than full- fledged educators (Varghese et al., 2016). Their struggles for recognition mirror broader systemic inequalities faced by non-Western educators in U.S. schools, where native English- speaking teachers are often privileged in hiring and career advancement (García & Wei, 2014). Similar patterns have been identified in other national contexts as well. For example, Cho (2010) found that immigrant teacher candidates in Canada had to navigate deficit discourses that questioned their competence and legitimacy. Similarly, Santoro (2007) documented how culturally diverse teachers in Australia were often positioned as “others,” expected to assimilate into dominant school cultures rather than being recognized for their unique contributions. These 109 studies reinforce the present findings by highlighting that TCTs’ experience of marginalization reflect a broader, cross-national pattern of structural inequality in teacher professionalization. The study also highlights the tensions between immersion policies and bilingual instructional realities. Many TCTs work in Chinese-English Dual Language Immersion (DLI) programs, where language policies mandate at least 90% target-language instruction. While these policies aim to promote immersion, they often fail to acknowledge the cognitive benefits of translanguaging practices (García & Lin, 2016). The strict enforcement of monoglossic policies places additional stress on TCTs, who must balance language expectations with student comprehension and engagement. Over time, many TCTs have been adapting their teaching to better align with students’ needs while still complying with institutional mandates. Moreover, this study highlights the structural challenges in Chinese language education, including the lack of standardized curricula and assessment frameworks. Unlike other world languages such as Spanish or French, which benefit from established national guidelines, Chinese language instruction in the U.S. remains fragmented and inconsistently supported. As a result, many TCTs must create their own teaching materials and assessments, placing additional labor burdens on them (Chen & Barros, 2022). This lack of formalized curricular support reinforces the marginalized status of Chinese language education, positioning it as a foreign rather than an integral part of dual language education. One of the most pressing issues identified in this study is the impact of visa dependency on TCTs’ career stability and professional mobility. Many TCTs rely on H-1B visas, which tie their employment status to their sponsoring school district. This dependency limits their ability to seek career advancement, change schools, or negotiate better working conditions (Hua, 2019). Visa uncertainty also creates emotional stress, as many TCTs must make difficult decisions 110 about whether to remain in the U.S. or return to China, often weighing professional aspirations against familial obligations (Xing & Rojewski, 2018). The structural barriers imposed by immigration policies further underscore the precarity of transnational teaching careers in the U.S. Despite these challenges, TCTs also demonstrate remarkable resilience and adaptability. Many develop professional learning communities with other Chinese educators, collaboratively designing curricula, sharing best practices, and advocating for the legitimacy of their subject area. These grassroots efforts reflect their agency in shaping Chinese language education in the U.S. and ensuring its sustainability despite institutional constraints. Accordingly, this study contributes to the growing body of research on transnational teachers, bilingual education, and teacher identity development, offering insights into how transnational Chinese educators negotiate their professional roles, adapt their pedagogical approaches, and challenge institutional barriers. By examining these experiences through a discourse analysis framework, this dissertation provides a nuanced understanding of the systemic challenges and opportunities that shape TCTs’ work in the U.S. Limitation of the Study and for Future Research While this study offers valuable insights into the professional experiences of transnational Chinese language teachers, several limitations should be acknowledged. This study was based on five participants who were enrolled in the WLTCP and mostly worked in Midwestern state school districts. While their experiences provide rich, qualitative insights, they cannot be generalized to all TCTs in the U.S. Future research could expand the sample size and methodology (e.g., mixed-methods) and include TCTs working in diverse geographic regions, such as suburban districts where Chinese language programs may operate under different institutional policies and community expectations (Sung & Tsai, 2019). 111 Secondly, all participants in this study were recruited from the same teacher certification program, which may have influenced their perspectives on professional training, classroom preparation, and institutional support. While their shared programmatic background allowed for a cohesive analysis of teacher preparation experiences, it does not account for the diverse pathways through which Chinese language teachers enter U.S. schools. Future studies could compare TCTs who come through alternative certification routes, such as state-sponsored international teacher programs, or direct school hiring, to examine how different pathways shape teacher identity and professional adaptation. Thirdly, this study captures TCTs’ experiences at specific points in their professional trajectories, but it does not offer a longitudinal analysis of their career development. Future research could adopt a longitudinal design to track how transnational teachers evolve over multiple years, examining how their professional identities, instructional strategies, and career decisions shift over time. Such studies would provide deeper insights into teacher retention, career advancement, and long-term adaptation. While this study focuses on TCTs’ experiences, it does not include perspectives from students, school administrators, or mentor teachers, who also play crucial roles in shaping teachers’ professional legitimacy and instructional effectiveness. Future research could triangulate data from multiple stakeholders, offering a more holistic understanding of how transnational teachers are perceived and supported within their schools. Nevertheless, despite these limitations, this study offers meaningful contributions through its discourse analysis approach. By examining how participants narrate their experience and position themselves in relation to institutional, linguistic, and cultural discourses, this study reveals how a broader system of power shape teachers’ professional identities. The discourse 112 lens enables a nuanced understanding of how TCTs both internalize and resist dominant ideologies, such as native-speakerism, monolingual norms, and hierarchical labor structures, which highlight their agency in navigating marginality. The study not just explores what TCT experience, but how they make meaning of their experience, which is a key strength of qualitative, discourse-informed inquiry. 113 BIBLIOGRAPHY ACTFL. (21 May 2010). Use of the target language in the classroom. https://www.actfl.org/ advocacy/actfl-position-statements/use-the-target-language-the-classroom Adair-Hauck, B., Glisan, E. W., & Troyan, F. J. (2013). Implementing Integrated Performance Assessment. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). Amuedo-Dorantes, C., & Furtado, D. (2019). Settling for academia? H-1B visas and the career choices of international students in the United States. Journal of Human Resources, 54(2), 401–429. https://doi-org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.3368/jhr.54.2.0816.8167r1 Apple, M. W. (2018). Can education change society? Routledge. Bach, J. A., & Werner, R. G. (2013). How to secure your H-1B visa: A practical guide for international professionals and their US employers (1st ed. 2013.). Apress: Imprint: Apress. Ball, S. J. (2012). Global education inc.: New policy networks and the neo-liberal imaginary. Routledge. Ball, S. J. (2012). Performativity, commodification and commitment: An I-Spy guide to the neo- liberal university. British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(1), 17–28. Bauböck, R. (2003). Towards a political theory of migrant transnationalism. International Migration Review, 37(3), 700–723. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2003.tb00155 Bazeley, P. (2020). Qualitative Data Analysis. SAGE. Bigo, D., & Walker, R. B. J. (2007). Political sociology and the problem of the international. Millennium, 35(3), 725–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298070350030401 Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. K. Brown (Ed.), Knowledge, education, and cultural change: Papers in the sociology of education (pp. 71–84). London, Tavistock. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 114 Callahan, P. C., & Brantlinger, A. (2023). Altruism, jobs, and alternative certification: Mathematics teachers’ reasons for entry and their retention. Education and Urban Society, 55(9), 1089–1119. https://doi- org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/00131245221110559 Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J. (2012). Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers.The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251-269. Cardozo-Gaibisso, L., Allexsaht-Snider, M., & Buxton, C. (2017). Curriculum in motion for English language learners in science: Teachers supporting newcomer unaccompanied youth. In L. de Oliveira & K. Campbell Wilcox (Eds.), Teaching science to English language learners: Preparing pre-service and in-service teachers (pp. 7–29). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53594-4_2 Carver-Thomas, D. (2018). Diversifying the teaching profession: How to recruit and retain teachers of color. Learning Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/559.310 Carver-Thomas, D. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher turnover: Why it matters and what we can do about it. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/454.278 Chang, I. (2003). The Chinese in America: A narrative history. Viking. Chang, S. (2024). From nonheritage to future heritage: A case study of a Chinse bilingual teacher’s perceptions of diverse Chinse-English dual language immersion learners. In K. Sung (Ed.), Chinese-English Dual Language Immersion Programs Content Area Instruction, Learners, and Evaluations (pp. 109-127). Lexington Books. Chen, M. (2023). A Review of the contemporary challenges faced by Chinese immersion education and its related teacher preparations in the United States. Journal of Education, 203(4), 961–970. https://doi-org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/00220574221075199 Chen, M., & Barros, S. R. (2022). Language awareness and the online experiences of transnational Chinese dual language teachers during the global pandemic. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 3(1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.1558/jmtp.21184 Chen, M., & Gu, Z. (2024). Integrated Performance Assessment (IPA) in Chinese language classrooms: Pre-service instructors’ perception of IPA implementation in the Chinese- English DLI program. In K. Sung (Ed.), Chinese-English Dual Language Immersion Programs Content Area Instruction, Learners, and Evaluations (pp. 235–251). Lexington Books. Cho, C. L. (2010). "Qualifying" as teacher: Immigrant teacher candidates' counter-stories. Canadian Journal of Education, 33(3), 588–616. 115 Collins, R. (1998). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Collins, R. (2004). Interaction ritual chains. Princeton University Press. Collins, R. (2008). Violence: A micro-sociological theory. Princeton University Press. Compton, M., & Alsford, S. (2024). Prestige, Power, Practice, and Professional Development: Exploring transnational teachers’ experiences of a UK-based lecturer development course. International Journal for Academic Development, 29, 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2022.2119240 Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Darder, A. (2012). Culture and power in the classroom: Educational foundations for the schooling of bicultural students. Paradigm Publishers. De Costa, P. I., Rawal, H., & Li, W. (2018). Broadening the second language teacher education agenda: International perspectives on teacher emotions. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 401–409. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2018-0030 De Costa, P. I., Li, W., & Rawal, H. (2019). Language teacher emotions. Encyclopedia of teacher education, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1179-6_262-1 De Costa, P. I., Karimpour, S., & Nazari, M. (2023). Developing a taxonomy of teacher emotion labor through metaphor: personal, interpersonal, and sociocultural angles. Applied Linguistics Review, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2022-0191 De Costa, P. I., & Nazari, M. (2024). Emotion as pedagogy: Why the emotional labor of L2 educators matters. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2024-0218 Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Dervin, F. (2016). Interculturality in education: A theoretical and methodological toolbox. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 116 Dewaele, J., Chen, X., Padilla, A.M., & Lake, J. (2019). The Flowering of Positive Psychology in Foreign Language Teaching and Acquisition Research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi-org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02128 Dillard, N. C. (2023). ABC...HIJ, Is the U.S. Teacher Shortage Here to Stay? Using U.S. Immigration Policy to Address the Domestic Teaching Shortage. Journal of Law & Education, 52(1), 46–103. DiMaggio, P. (1982). Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status culture participation on the grades of U.S. high school students. American Sociological Review, 47(2), 189-201. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094962 DiMaggio, P., & Mohr, J. (1985). Cultural capital, educational attainment, and martial selection. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 1231–1236. doi:10.1086/228209 Donnellan, L., & Edmondson, S. (2019). A comparison of pedagogy in China and USA classrooms. Journal of Academic Perspectives, 2019(2). https://www.journalofacademicperspectives.com Doran, K., Gelber, A., & Isen, A. (2014). The effects of high-skilled immigration policy on firms: Evidence from visa lotteries (NBER Working Paper No. 20668). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w20668 Duff, P. (2008). Language socialization, higher education, and work. In P. Duff & N. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Vol. 8: Language socialization (pp. 257–270). Springer. Dunn, A. H. (2013). Teachers without borders? The hidden consequences of international teachers in U.S. schools. Teachers College Press. Evans, M. D. R., Kelley, J., & Sikora, J. (2014). Scholarly culture and academic performance in 42 nations. Social Forces, 92, 1573–1605. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sou030 Fairley, M. J. (2023). Theorizing Transnational Language Teacher (Educator) identities: An Autoethnographic study of a border dweller. L2 Journal, 15(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.5070/l2.2465 Faist, T., & Bilecen, B. (2019). Transnationalism. In Routledge Internatioanl Handbook of Migration Studies (2nd ed., pp. 499–511). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315458298-47 Feng, S., & Tan, C. Y. (2024). Toward conceptual clarity for digital cultural and social capital in student learning: Insights from a systematic literature review. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1–15. https://doi- org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1057/s41599-023-02519-8 117 Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149 Freeman, D., & Johnson, K. E. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowledge-base of language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 397-417. García, O., & Lin, A. M. Y. (2016). Translanguaging in bilingual education. In O. García, A. M. Y. Lin, & S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education (pp. 117–130). Springer. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan. Gándara, P., & Escamilla, K. (2017). Bilingual education in the United States. In O. García, A. M. Y. Lin, & S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education (pp. 439–452). Springer. Garrett, T. (2008). Student-centered and teacher-centered classroom management: A case study of three elementary teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 43(1), 34–47. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ829018.pdf Garrett, P., & Cots, J. M. (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Language Awareness. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676494 Gartman, D. (1991). Culture as class symbolization or mass reification? A critique of Bourdieu’s distinction. American Journal of Sociology, 97(2), 421–447. https://doi.org/10.1086/229784 Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press. Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourse. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA27739410 Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.gbv.de/dms/hebis-darmstadt/toc/179410822.pdf Ghosh, A., & Fouad, N. A. (2016). Family influence on careers among Asian parent-child dyads. Journal of Career Assessment, 24(2), 318–332. https://doi- org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/1069072715580417 Gibbons, P. (2015). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching English language learners in the mainstream classroom (2nd ed.). Heinemann. 118 Gillette, S. (2021). A comparative study on classroom management strategies between Chinese- born and American-born Chinese teachers in U.S. secondary schools. Milligan University. Gist, C. D., Bianco, M., & Lynn, M. (2019). Examining grow your own programs across the teacher development continuum: Mining research on teachers of color and nontraditional educator pipelines. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(1), 13–25. Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(8), 835–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-051x(98)00025-0 Haualand, H., Kusters, A., & Friedner, M. (2016). Transnationalism. In The SAGE Deaf Studies Encyclopedia (Vol. 3, pp. 980-982). SAGE Publications, Inc, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483346489 Hazen, H., & Alberts, H. C. (2006). Visitors or immigrants? International students in the United States. Population, Space and Place/Population Space and Place, 12(3), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.409 He, Y., Ouyang, Q., & Zhang, H. (2022). Chinese dual language immersion teacher professional learning community. Educational Research and Development Journal, 25(2), 53–70. Hingorani, A. (2023). The latest teaching shortage in the United States: Current proposed incentives lack consideration of the Cobweb Model implications. Creighton Law Review, 56(4), 519–540. Hoffmann, A. (2021). The transnational and the international: From critique of statism to transversal lines. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 35(6), 796–810. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2021.1893271 Hornberger, N. H., & Johnson, D. C. (2007). Slicing the onion ethnographically: Layers and spaces in multilingual language education policy and practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41(3), 509–532. Hua, V. (2019). Parental influence on second-generation Chinese-American students' career choices. CUNY Academic Works. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/2238/ IIE (2018). Open Doors 2018 Fast Facts. IIE (2023). Enrollment Trends - IIE open doors. IIE Open Doors / Enrollment Trends. https://opendoorsdata.org/data/international-students/enrollment-trends/ Ingersoll, R. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? https://doi.org/10.1037/e382722004-001 James, C., Garrett, P., Garett, P. I. L., & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Language awareness in the classroom. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315845524 119 Kasun, G. S., & Sánchez, P. (2022). Transnationalism and education in the United States. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.458 Klingenberg, A., Luetz, J. M., & Crawford, A. F. (2020). Transnationalism—Recognizing the strengths of dual belonging for both migrant and society. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 22(2), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-019-00744-2 Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Lamont, M., & Lareau, A. (1988). Cultural capital: allusions, gaps and glissandos in recent theoretical developments. Sociological Theory/Sociological Theory, 6(2), 153-168 https://doi.org/10.2307/202113 Lareau, A. (2002). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lareau, A., & Weininger, E. (2003). Cultural capital in educational research: A critical assessment. Theory and Society, 32, 567–606. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:ryso.0000004951.04408.b0 Levitt, P., & Glick Schiller, N. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: A transnational social field perspective on society. International Migration Review, 38(3), 1002–1039. Lewis, M., & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (1993). Handbook of emotions. Guilford Press. Li, Y. (2015). History of Chinese language education and the development of textbooks in the United States. Chinese America: History and Perspectives, 75-81. https://catalog.lib.msu.edu/EdsRecord/31h,114499678 Liao, W., Yuan, R. E., & Hong, Z. (2017). Chinese language teachers’ challenges in teaching in U.S. public Schools: A dynamic portrayal. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 26(6), 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-017-0356-z Liao, W., & Maddamsetti, J. (2019). Transnationality and Teacher Educator Identity Development: A Collaborative Autoethnographic study. Action in Teacher Education, 41(4), 287–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1604275 Lieberman, M. (2021). The school staffing crisis won’t end any time soon. EdWeek. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/the-school-staffing-crisis-wont-end-anytime- soon/2021/1 Little, J. W. (1996). The emotional contours and career trajectories of (disappointed) reform enthusiasts. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(3), 345–359. 120 Lukin, A. (2019). The US–China trade war and China's strategic future. Survival, 61(1), 23-50. doi:10.1080/00396338.2019.1568045 Luo, H., Li, Y., & Li, M. (2019). Heritage language education in the United States: A national survey of college‐level Chinese language programs. Foreign Language Annals, 52(1), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12378 Luo, L. (2016). The current state and prospects of Chinese teaching in the United States. Chinese Education and Society, 49(6), 376–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10611932.2016.1252216 Mancuso, S. V., Roberts, L., & White, G. P. (2011). Teacher retention in international schools: The key role of school leadership. Journal of Research in International Education, 10(3), 306–323. Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass. Miller, P. W., Ochs, K., & Mulvaney, G. (2008). International Teacher Migration and the Commonwealth Teacher Recruitment Protocol: Assessing Its Impact and the Implementation Process in the United Kingdom. European Education, 40(3), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.2753/EUE1056-4934400305 National Center for Education Statistics. (2023, December 6). Forty-Four percent of public schools operating without a full teaching staff in October, new NCES data show. www.nces.gov. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Nias, J. (1996). Thinking about Feeling: the emotions in teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(3), 293–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764960260301 Ong, A. (2006). Neoliberalism as exception: Mutations in citizenship and sovereignty. Duke University Press. Padilla, A. M., Fan, L., Xu, X., & Silva, D. M. (2013). A Mandarin/English two-way immersion program: Language proficiency and academic achievement. Foreign Language Annals, 46(4), 661–679. Paige, R. (2002). Meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge: The Secretary’s annual report on teacher quality. U.S. Department of Education 121 Palmer, D., & Martínez, R. A. (2013). Teacher agency in bilingual spaces: A fresh look at preparing teachers to educate Latina/o bilingual children. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), 269–297. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X12463556 Peck, S. (2019). Transnational social capital: the socio‐spatialities of civil society. Global Networks, 20(1), 126–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12234 Petrón, M. (2009). Transnational Teachers of English in Mexico. High School Journal, 92(4), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.0.0028 Pew Research Center. (2025, May 1). Key facts about Asian Americans. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/05/01/key-facts-about-asians-in-the-us/ Phillion, J. (2003). Obstacles to accessing the teaching profession for immigrant women. Multicultural Education, 11(1), 41–45. Portes, A. (2001). Introduction: the debates and significance of immigrant transnationalism. Global Networks, 1(3), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0374.00012 Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach. Bloomsbury. Robinson, W. I. (1998). Beyond nation-state paradigms: Globalization, sociology, and the challenge of transnational studies. Sociological Forum, 13(4), 561–594. Roose, H. (2015). Signs of “emerging” cultural capital? Analysing symbolic struggles using class specific analysis. Sociology, 49(3), 556–573. doi:10.1177/0038038514544492 Ruiz, N. T., & Baird, P. J. (2013). Transnational teacher education: Towards theory and practice. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 4(1), 60–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/26390043.2013.12067768 Sachs, J. D. (2019). Will America create a Cold War with China. China Economic Journal, 12(2), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538963.2019.1601811 Sadeghi, K., & Pourbahram, R. (2024). Transnational English language teacher wellbeing: An ecological perspective. Porta Linguarum, IX, 135–152. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.viix.29881 Santoro, N. (2007). ‘Outsiders’ and ‘others’: Different’ teachers teaching in culturally diverse classrooms. Teachers and Teaching, 13(1), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600601106104 Schiller, N. G., Basch, L., & Blanc-Szanton, C. (1992). Transnationalism: a new analytic framework for understanding migration. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 645(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1992.tb33484.x 122 Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books. Stake, R. E. (1994). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 236–247). SAGE Publications. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage Publications. Stake, R. E. (2005). Multiple case study analysis. https://experts.illinois.edu/en/publications/multiple-case-study-analysis Steele, J. L., Slater, R., Zamarro, G., Miller, T., Li, J., Burkhauser, S., & Bacon, M. (2017). Effects of dual-language immersion programs on student achievement: Evidence from lottery data. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 282–306. Sung, K. (2020). Parent satisfaction and one-way Mandarin Chinese dual-language programs in Utah. Bilingual Research Journal, 43(4), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2020.1825540 Sung, K., & Tsai, H. (2019). Mandarin Chinese dual language immersion programs. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788923965 Tedeschi, M., Vorobeva, E., & Jauhiainen, J. S. (2020). Transnationalism: current debates and new perspectives. GeoJournal, 87(2), 603–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020- 10271-8 Tedick, D. J., & Lyster, R. (2020). Scaffolding language development in immersion and dual language classrooms. Routledge. Tian, Z. (2021). Translanguaging design in a third grade Chinese Language Arts class. Applied Linguistics Review, 13(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2021-0024 Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD. Turnbull, M., & Dailey-O'Cain, J. (2009). First language use in second and foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters. U.S. Department of State. (2020, December 1). Briefing With Senior U.S. Government Officials On the Closure of the Chinese Consulate in Houston, Texas - United States Department of State. https://2017-2021.state.gov/briefing-with-senior-u-s-government-officials-on- the-closure-of-the-chinese-consulate-in-houston-texas/ Ustuk, Ö. (2021). “Not me with my American flag”: Transnational teachers’ trajectories of language teacher socialization. TESL-EJ, 25(3), 1–16. 123 Varghese, M. M., Motha, S., Trent, J., Park, G., & Reeves, J. (2016). Language teacher identity in multilingual settings. TESOL Quarterly, 50(3), 545–571. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.333 Wang, I. K. (2022). Toward an ecological understanding of transnational Chinese language teachers’ professional wellbeing in the United Kingdom. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1- 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.877289 Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. Wong, C. & Tian, Z. (2024). Integration of content and language instruction in an immserion setting through Chinese and English teacher collaboration. In K. Sung (Ed.), Chinese- English Dual Language Immersion Programs Content Area Instruction, Learners, and Evaluations (pp. 21-41). Lexington Books. Woods, J. R. (2016). Mitigating teacher shortages: alternative teacher certification. Teacher Shortage Series. https://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/Mitigating-Teacher-Shortages- Alternative-Certification.pdf Woods, P., & Jeffrey, B. (1996). Teachable moments: The art of teaching in primary schools. Open University Press. Wren-Owens, L. (2023). Transnational teaching practice and the curriculum. Forum Italicum, 57(2), 390–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/00145858231172187 Wu, M.-H., & Opstad, S. L. (2021). Changing worlds, changing classrooms: Satellite children and their teachers in the transnational era. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 11(1), Article 4. https://research.library.fordham.edu/jmer/vol11/iss1/4/ Xie, S., Wu, D., & Li, H. (2022). The relationship between Chinese teachers’ emotional labor, teaching efficacy, and young children’s social-emotional development and learning. Sustainability, 14(4), Article 2205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042205 Xing, X., & Rojewski, J. W. (2018). Family influences on career decision-making self-efficacy of Chinese secondary vocational students. New Waves Educational Research & Development, 21(1), 48–67. Xing, X., & Rojewski, J. W. (2018). Family influence on career development of Chinese college students. Springer. Yeoh, B. S. A., & Collins, F. L. (2022). Handbook on transnationalism. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904017 Zhou, W., & Li, G. (2015). Pedagogical challenges in cross-cultural Chinese language teaching: Perceptions and experiences of Chinese immersion teachers in the U.S. In P. Smith & A. 124 Kumi-Yeboah (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Cross-Cultural Approaches to Language and Literacy Development (pp. 159–183). IGI Global. Zoeller, E., & Briceño, A. (2022). “We can be bilingual rather than an English learner”: Transnational teachers developing strength-based, language-focused pedagogy. Teacher Education Quarterly, 49(2), 33-57. 125