According to China’s ministry of education (MoE), transnational higher education (TNHE) programs hosted in Chinese universities are required to import at least one third of their curriculum from the foreign partner universities. This policy, known as the “One Third Curriculum Policy,” includes four rules: 1) the imported foreign courses shall account for at least one third of all courses in the program; 2) the imported foreign specialization core courses shall account for at least one third of all core courses in the program; 3) the number of the specialization core courses delivered by the teaching staff of the foreign partner universities shall account for at least one third of all courses in the program; 4) the academic hours of the specialization core courses delivered by the teaching staff of the foreign partner university shall account for at least one third of all academic hours in the program. Despite the MoE’s good intentions, it is widely acknowledged that the policy is difficult to implement in local Chinese universities (e.g., Hou, Montgomery, & McDowell, 2014). However, little evidence to date is available to explain systematically why this curriculum policy implementation has been ineffective. To investigate this problem, the study on which this article is based aims to ascertain multilevel factors impeding the effective implementation of the “One Third Curriculum Policy” in TNHE programs hosted at local Chinese universities (i.e., nonprestigious universities administrated by local governments). The overarching research question is; What are the barriers, and how do these barriers impede the effective implementation of the “One Third Curriculum Policy” in TNHE programs hosted at local Chinese universities? Twelve Impeding Factors This multiple case study involves four public universities administrated by a provincial government in China. Qualitative content analysis of documents, student questionnaires, and semistructured staff interviews reveal disparate practices of TNHE curriculum policy implementation in local contexts. A total of 12 impeding factors emerge as the most prominent barriers to the TNHE curriculum policy implementation at the local Chinese universities. This article reports major findings in relation to one barrier, as outlined below. Insufficient level of foreign language proficiency among students According to staff interviewees, the implementation of the “One Third Curriculum Policy” was impeded by the students’ low level of foreign language proficiency. This factor was evident in the students’ difficulties in understanding the imported foreign courses taught by visiting foreign teachers, and in their low rates of passing international languages tests (e.g., TOEFL, TOPIK, and TestDaF) to pursue foreign degrees. Three primary causes for the students’ low level of foreign language proficiency emerged from data analysis: low entry requirements of the TNHE programs; problematic foreign language teaching; and a lack of motivation on the part of students to learn foreign languages. Three primary causes First, due to higher costs than for domestic programs, the four universities chose to lower the entry requirements of their TNHE programs in order to enroll enough students. As a result, the programs admitted students with a gaokao (national higher education entrance examination) score lower than the score required for domestic programs. A lower gaokao score, especially in a foreign language subject, does not necessarily mean that the student is performing poorly. But it may indicate a starting point where students are less academically qualified or prepared to take courses taught by foreign teachers. Consequently, these students would need additional and effective learning support from the beginning of their programs. However, learning support for students was found to be insufficient and ineffective at the four universities, because the teaching in the TNHE programs is largely problematic. For example, local Chinese teachers use traditional syllabi designed for domestic programs with a grammar–translation teaching approach, while foreign teachers are advised to, or prefer to use official guidelines and workbooks for international foreign language tests, which focus more on listening and speaking skills. These two approaches develop ostensibly different language skills in students and thus could be expected to complement each other. However, both student and staff interviewees comment that the two approaches are not integrated due to a lack of coherence and consistency in content and pedagogy. As a result, students are not effectively supported to develop well-rounded foreign language skills. The third obstacle is a lack of motivation to learn foreign languages among the students. As many as 52.2 percent of the students report no intention to study abroad or to obtain a foreign degree. This means that more than half of the students in this study are not attracted by overseas study opportunities or a foreign degree offered by the program. As such, a question arises: What motivates these students to apply for TNHE programs? The foremost motivation reported by students is the programs’ lower entry requirements, allowing them to study in a better Chinese university with a lower gaokao score. In other words, the students’ real intentions are not to study a foreign language and acquire a foreign degree, but to take advantage of their family’s wealth and the programs’ lower entry requirements to access better educational resources in a better Chinese university. Serious Consequences The three factors reported above have resulted in a dominance, in TNHE programs at local Chinese universities, of students who are less qualified and less motivated, and who have a low level of foreign language proficiency. This in turn affects the effectiveness of the delivery of the imported foreign courses in TNHE programs, as required by the “One Third Curriculum Policy.” These findings yield important implications for TNHE education and research. First, without a sufficient foreign language proficiency or an intention to earn a foreign degree, students are likely to be less motivated to complete the foreign curricular elements of the TNHE programs. This may pose great challenges to both local and foreign teachers in motivating and engaging these students in learning. Second, students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, especially those from remote rural areas, are more likely to avoid costly TNHE programs in China. The dominance of socioeconomically advantaged students may contribute to a reputation of TNHE in China as a “rich kids’ game,” adding insult to the existing injury of stratification and inequality in Chinese higher education (Yeung, 2013). If no shift from quantity to quality is made, as Altbach and de Wit (2018) call for, TNHE in China may ultimately be “on life support” (p. 2). As a possible solution, practitioner and scholarly efforts are needed to explore innovative and inclusive learning supports that improve foreign language proficiency among students and transform them into highly qualified and motivated TNHE learners.