In fact, it's a reaction to the proliferation of China English studies, when I really think about it.
What influenced me to change this from a "what is China English" study to a "what do people think about English in China" study?
1. The growing consensus that labelling individual varieties of English in the Kachruvian framework is to some extent ideological
2. The notion (promoted by Saraceni) that it's more worthwhile to look at very particular contexts rather than whole "Englishes"
3. The fact that nobody I work with at UBC is academic progeny of any WEs scholars
4. I'm not entirely enthusiastic about what can be revealed by asking people direct questions about "China English"
5. I think that ideology and attitude have important implications for WE theory, but that they don't necessarily have to be attitudes and ideologies directly expressed about a variety.
Most importantly, I think that there isn't enough done to get at people's attitudes and reactions to particular instances of language use and exploring how they make judgments about language from an ideological/social perspective.
I think that's it.