With the emergence of different varieties of English in the world, the issue of intelligibility has attracted many researchers’ attention. While a large number of studies have focused on the intelligibility of different English varieties for native speakers, few of them have involved Chinese learners of English as participants; yet, they constitute the largest group of non-native English speakers. The current study aims to investigate Chinese university students’ perceived comprehensibility, i.e., intelligibility judgments, of nine English accents, including British, American, Australian, Indian, Philippine, Singaporean, French, Japanese, and South Korean English. Thirty-nine English major sophomores from a top university in China were invited to identify the speakers’ nationalities and assign ratings for their perceived comprehensibility of the nine English accents. A follow-up semi-structured interview was also undertaken. It was found that all of the participants could identify American English and most of them could also recognize British, Australian and South Korean English. In contrast, they could hardly recognize the other five English accents. With regard to perceived comprehensibility, the Inner Circle English accents on the whole are significantly more comprehensible than the Outer Circle and Expanding Circle English accents. Chinese university students’ perceived comprehensibility significantly correlates with properties of the speech. Moreover, it was observed that familiarity with English accents and speech properties may interplay and influence perceived comprehensibility. The study contributes to the ongoing literature on intelligibility and provides pedagogical implications for English education.

With the rapid integration of Generative AI in education, understanding students' ethical perspectives is crucial for effective AI ethics education. Five hundred and ninety four middle school students' agreement levels on five AI ethical principles (beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, autonomy, explicability) adapted from previous research, and the rationales underlying their choices were investigated using a questionnaire. Results showed that students expressed the highest agreement with “beneficence” and “autonomy,” though overall responses leaned toward neutrality. Independent AI use and family discussions predicted higher agreement; urban-rural differences were non-significant. Qualitative analysis identified themes in students' ethical reasoning. These findings offer evidence-based guidance for adolescent AI ethics education.