{"title":"Western Perceptions on Confucius Institute Advancement of Chinese Language and Culture: A Narrative Review","authors":"J. Acquaye","doi":"10.17265/2161-6248/2020.05.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":". Table 3 displays the collection of the key component of this review, being the perceptions presented by the authors depicting the mindset of the researchers, policy making groups, higher education committees, and associations in these respective countries about the partnership of CI and host universities. The author also tried to deduce the relevant findings of the topic and some conclusions or recommendations towards the perceived ideas about CIs. CONFUCIUS INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT OF CHINESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 191 Table 2 Basic Information of Selected Articles S/N Author’s Country’s of coverage Article title Year Main focus 1 Hartig F. Germany Confusion About CIs: Soft Power Push or Conspiracy? 2010 It focuses on the linkage between CI and the concepts of soft power, cultural diplomacy, and propaganda. 2 Wu T. Canada Canadians Perceptions of CI: Culture Experience or Political Propaganda? 2017 It focuses on revealing the cognitive obstacle between China and Canada relations from cultural field. 3 Kwok Jackson Australia Is There a Problem With ... CIs in Australia? 2018 Its focuses on Australian education system to be prepared for the global pressure of critics against CI cooperation on universities campuses. 4 Wang D. & Adamson B. China and USA (Review is based on USA) War and Peace: Views of CIs in China and USA 2015 It tries to compare the views held by media, academicians, politicians and other interest parties within China and USA on CI activities. 5 Kwan Y. W. C. Canada Cultural Diplomacy and Internationalization of Higher Education: The experiences of three CIs in Canada 2013 It focuses on the host universities perception of CI as China’s cultural diplomacy and soft power. 6 US Senate Permanent Sub-Committee on Investigations Report USA China’s Impact on the US Education System 2019 Its focus is critiquing CI operations on US higher education with the full support of Chinese government. The issues of CI Transparency with host institutions and countries as a whole. 7 American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Report North America On Partnerships with Foreign Governments: The Case of CI 2014 It focus on the issue of CI emulating the principle of cultural ambassadorship and its associate programs like the others (British Council, Alliance Francaise, etc.) but is relatively connected to imperial past, geopolitical agendas and soft power objectives. 8 Volpe M. & Quiyang L. Italy Image of CI in Italian Media Discourse 2016 It focuses on the international debate of china’s strategic expansion and global image and the corresponding aims of the CI. 9 Peterson R. (National Association of Scholars Report) USA Outsourced to China: CIs and soft power in American Higher Education 2017 It focuses on how Chinese government has planted CI to offer Chinese language and culture courses in colleges and university across the world with more in the US. 10 Conservative Party Human Rights Commission Report UK China’s CIs: An Inquiry by the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission 2019 It tries to explore allegations on CIs in British Higher Education as a positive or negative influence. 11 Whittaker S. Review is based on USA China’s Rise and the CI: Chinese and American Perspectives 2013 It tries to understand and explores how CI is perceived in the eyes of American critics of Chinese government influencing American educators in restricting academic freedom. CONFUCIUS INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT OF CHINESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 192 Table 3 Perceptions, Findings, and Way Forward S/N Review article title Perceptions Some related findings Some related recommendations or conclusions 1 Confusion about CIs: Soft Power Push or Conspiracy The financial and organizational linkage of CI with the Chinese government has created the assumption of CI as a propaganda tool of Chinese government. CI obeys and operates by the local laws of its host and respect local cultural exchanges. There is no interference of CI headquarters (Hanban) on content of study materials. CI is serving the purpose of cultural diplomacy for international environment to know more about China’s achievements. CIs do not tell lies or half-truth but when it comes to some topics, they are silent or quiet. 2 Canadians Perceptions of CI: Culture Experience or Political Propaganda? It argues that, CI act as an arm of Chinese government. As an educational institution, CI cannot abide by the principle of independence from governmental interference. Canadian researchers and groups have divergent understanding of CIs as a political structure by the Chinese government. CI is being used by Chinese government in host institutions to influence academic freedom of what to teach and learn. China insist on its establishment as strictly aiming to help foreigners learn Chinese language and culture as a way of building mutual understanding of china and the world. The benefits associated with China’s CI are currently limited to shaping preferences in language learning attitudes towards China. 3 Is There a Problem With ... CIs in Australia? It follows global perception of CI being used as a political propaganda purposes and undermining of academic freedom as critique by other countries intellectuals. Australian perception about CI has no solid foundation of real situations but based on critiques views. Stating that allegations overstate the degree of influences by CI. General preparation against intellectual pressure is envisage from visiting scholars from aggressive countries against CI. Australian universities should re-examine its contract, increase supervision of CI activities and enforce stringent measures to safeguard academic freedom of expressions. Strict internal assessment of CI review by a neutral board without CI Directors to help straighten and manage the activities of the institute. University education should never be subjected to any government or political organizations peril. 4 War and Peace: Views of CIs in China and USA. The wide spread of CI is an issue of controversial role and ideological identity with the potentiality of spreading Chinese government propaganda and authoritarianism. China-USA Chinese language advancement came into place after it was listed under the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI) by the President of United states in 2001. The fast development of China in global matters is casting growing fear on the US with China’s soft power of cultural hegemony, and of threat of academic freedom posed by the presence of CI on university campuses. The rising wave of Chinese popularity has a great commercial viability due to China’s economic and political strength but if China should lose this, the desire to study Chinese will fall or decline. The proposal for the transformation of CI from ambiguous cultural institute into an international research center and quality Chinese teacher education center will boost its practicability and sustenance. 5 Cultural Diplomacy and Internationalizatio n of Higher Education: The experiences of three CIs in Canada The CI is a construction of China’s cultural diplomacy and soft power strategy. There is really little knowledge about CI organization and administration with partner institutions. The model of CI is a little different from the western counterparts. There are symbiotic relationship benefits of hosting or partnering with a Chinese university through a CI. The sustainability of the CI in the future is not justifiable unless a critical review is done. CONFUCIUS INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT OF CHINESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 193 (Table 3 to be continued) 6 China’s Impact on the US Education System CIs are not strictly a cultural institute but are organizations of Chinese government. CI setup in US educational system is propagating China’s economic strength and poses a security threat. CI operations in US institutions have non-disclosure provisions and adherence to both China and US law. US institutions should insist on CI centers to remain transparent and open to all level of operations and be independent of Chinese government control to be a non-governmental organization (NGO). US institutions should continue to partner with Chinese universities but should never under anyway compromise academic freedom. 7 On Partnerships with Foreign Governments: The Case of CI The non-adherence by foreign institutions and organizations to the professional bodies standards and practices (Employment by partner institutions within local context). The CI is to educate Americans to know more about China than political regimes of any deviance. Tries to request CI for openness and transparency in all its dealings with institutions and country as a whole. Informing all American agency dealings with CI to ensure America first. China should demonstrate that, CIs are not engage in espionage, surveillance, propaganda or censorship. 8 Image of CI in Italian Media Discourse A response to global debate of CI aims and the truth about its operations against political propaganda and the threat to academic freedom. There are counter expressions by some intellectuals within the Italian education system about CI as Chinese government political propaganda and academic freedom issues in partner institutions. Italian intellectuals, CI exhibits a partial view of Chinese world and stress on the importance of CI being an international platform for cultural exchange and the maintenance of academic freedom 9 Outsourced to China: CIs and soft power in American Higher Education CI is a part of Chinese government overseas propaganda efforts as weapons of soft power. Chinese government is using CI to whitewashed, censored and entice partner institutions with financial and funding support in Chinese language and culture advancement. Should end all contracts with Hanban and not renew expiring contracts. Register CI as international agency and be subjected to transparency and declaration of all financial dealings with partner institutions. 10 China’s CIs: An Inquir","PeriodicalId":159185,"journal":{"name":"US-China education review","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"US-China education review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-6248/2020.05.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
. Table 3 displays the collection of the key component of this review, being the perceptions presented by the authors depicting the mindset of the researchers, policy making groups, higher education committees, and associations in these respective countries about the partnership of CI and host universities. The author also tried to deduce the relevant findings of the topic and some conclusions or recommendations towards the perceived ideas about CIs. CONFUCIUS INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT OF CHINESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 191 Table 2 Basic Information of Selected Articles S/N Author’s Country’s of coverage Article title Year Main focus 1 Hartig F. Germany Confusion About CIs: Soft Power Push or Conspiracy? 2010 It focuses on the linkage between CI and the concepts of soft power, cultural diplomacy, and propaganda. 2 Wu T. Canada Canadians Perceptions of CI: Culture Experience or Political Propaganda? 2017 It focuses on revealing the cognitive obstacle between China and Canada relations from cultural field. 3 Kwok Jackson Australia Is There a Problem With ... CIs in Australia? 2018 Its focuses on Australian education system to be prepared for the global pressure of critics against CI cooperation on universities campuses. 4 Wang D. & Adamson B. China and USA (Review is based on USA) War and Peace: Views of CIs in China and USA 2015 It tries to compare the views held by media, academicians, politicians and other interest parties within China and USA on CI activities. 5 Kwan Y. W. C. Canada Cultural Diplomacy and Internationalization of Higher Education: The experiences of three CIs in Canada 2013 It focuses on the host universities perception of CI as China’s cultural diplomacy and soft power. 6 US Senate Permanent Sub-Committee on Investigations Report USA China’s Impact on the US Education System 2019 Its focus is critiquing CI operations on US higher education with the full support of Chinese government. The issues of CI Transparency with host institutions and countries as a whole. 7 American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Report North America On Partnerships with Foreign Governments: The Case of CI 2014 It focus on the issue of CI emulating the principle of cultural ambassadorship and its associate programs like the others (British Council, Alliance Francaise, etc.) but is relatively connected to imperial past, geopolitical agendas and soft power objectives. 8 Volpe M. & Quiyang L. Italy Image of CI in Italian Media Discourse 2016 It focuses on the international debate of china’s strategic expansion and global image and the corresponding aims of the CI. 9 Peterson R. (National Association of Scholars Report) USA Outsourced to China: CIs and soft power in American Higher Education 2017 It focuses on how Chinese government has planted CI to offer Chinese language and culture courses in colleges and university across the world with more in the US. 10 Conservative Party Human Rights Commission Report UK China’s CIs: An Inquiry by the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission 2019 It tries to explore allegations on CIs in British Higher Education as a positive or negative influence. 11 Whittaker S. Review is based on USA China’s Rise and the CI: Chinese and American Perspectives 2013 It tries to understand and explores how CI is perceived in the eyes of American critics of Chinese government influencing American educators in restricting academic freedom. CONFUCIUS INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT OF CHINESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 192 Table 3 Perceptions, Findings, and Way Forward S/N Review article title Perceptions Some related findings Some related recommendations or conclusions 1 Confusion about CIs: Soft Power Push or Conspiracy The financial and organizational linkage of CI with the Chinese government has created the assumption of CI as a propaganda tool of Chinese government. CI obeys and operates by the local laws of its host and respect local cultural exchanges. There is no interference of CI headquarters (Hanban) on content of study materials. CI is serving the purpose of cultural diplomacy for international environment to know more about China’s achievements. CIs do not tell lies or half-truth but when it comes to some topics, they are silent or quiet. 2 Canadians Perceptions of CI: Culture Experience or Political Propaganda? It argues that, CI act as an arm of Chinese government. As an educational institution, CI cannot abide by the principle of independence from governmental interference. Canadian researchers and groups have divergent understanding of CIs as a political structure by the Chinese government. CI is being used by Chinese government in host institutions to influence academic freedom of what to teach and learn. China insist on its establishment as strictly aiming to help foreigners learn Chinese language and culture as a way of building mutual understanding of china and the world. The benefits associated with China’s CI are currently limited to shaping preferences in language learning attitudes towards China. 3 Is There a Problem With ... CIs in Australia? It follows global perception of CI being used as a political propaganda purposes and undermining of academic freedom as critique by other countries intellectuals. Australian perception about CI has no solid foundation of real situations but based on critiques views. Stating that allegations overstate the degree of influences by CI. General preparation against intellectual pressure is envisage from visiting scholars from aggressive countries against CI. Australian universities should re-examine its contract, increase supervision of CI activities and enforce stringent measures to safeguard academic freedom of expressions. Strict internal assessment of CI review by a neutral board without CI Directors to help straighten and manage the activities of the institute. University education should never be subjected to any government or political organizations peril. 4 War and Peace: Views of CIs in China and USA. The wide spread of CI is an issue of controversial role and ideological identity with the potentiality of spreading Chinese government propaganda and authoritarianism. China-USA Chinese language advancement came into place after it was listed under the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI) by the President of United states in 2001. The fast development of China in global matters is casting growing fear on the US with China’s soft power of cultural hegemony, and of threat of academic freedom posed by the presence of CI on university campuses. The rising wave of Chinese popularity has a great commercial viability due to China’s economic and political strength but if China should lose this, the desire to study Chinese will fall or decline. The proposal for the transformation of CI from ambiguous cultural institute into an international research center and quality Chinese teacher education center will boost its practicability and sustenance. 5 Cultural Diplomacy and Internationalizatio n of Higher Education: The experiences of three CIs in Canada The CI is a construction of China’s cultural diplomacy and soft power strategy. There is really little knowledge about CI organization and administration with partner institutions. The model of CI is a little different from the western counterparts. There are symbiotic relationship benefits of hosting or partnering with a Chinese university through a CI. The sustainability of the CI in the future is not justifiable unless a critical review is done. CONFUCIUS INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT OF CHINESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 193 (Table 3 to be continued) 6 China’s Impact on the US Education System CIs are not strictly a cultural institute but are organizations of Chinese government. CI setup in US educational system is propagating China’s economic strength and poses a security threat. CI operations in US institutions have non-disclosure provisions and adherence to both China and US law. US institutions should insist on CI centers to remain transparent and open to all level of operations and be independent of Chinese government control to be a non-governmental organization (NGO). US institutions should continue to partner with Chinese universities but should never under anyway compromise academic freedom. 7 On Partnerships with Foreign Governments: The Case of CI The non-adherence by foreign institutions and organizations to the professional bodies standards and practices (Employment by partner institutions within local context). The CI is to educate Americans to know more about China than political regimes of any deviance. Tries to request CI for openness and transparency in all its dealings with institutions and country as a whole. Informing all American agency dealings with CI to ensure America first. China should demonstrate that, CIs are not engage in espionage, surveillance, propaganda or censorship. 8 Image of CI in Italian Media Discourse A response to global debate of CI aims and the truth about its operations against political propaganda and the threat to academic freedom. There are counter expressions by some intellectuals within the Italian education system about CI as Chinese government political propaganda and academic freedom issues in partner institutions. Italian intellectuals, CI exhibits a partial view of Chinese world and stress on the importance of CI being an international platform for cultural exchange and the maintenance of academic freedom 9 Outsourced to China: CIs and soft power in American Higher Education CI is a part of Chinese government overseas propaganda efforts as weapons of soft power. Chinese government is using CI to whitewashed, censored and entice partner institutions with financial and funding support in Chinese language and culture advancement. Should end all contracts with Hanban and not renew expiring contracts. Register CI as international agency and be subjected to transparency and declaration of all financial dealings with partner institutions. 10 China’s CIs: An Inquir
. 表3显示了本综述的关键组成部分,即作者提出的看法,描述了这些国家的研究人员、政策制定团体、高等教育委员会和协会对CI与东道国大学合作关系的看法。作者还试图推断出该主题的相关发现,以及一些结论或建议,以了解有关CIs的想法。《孔子学院中国语言与文化的进步》191表2文章基本信息编号作者所在国家报道年份重点关注1 Hartig F. Germany关于CIs的困惑:软实力推动还是阴谋?2010重点讨论了CI与软实力、文化外交和宣传概念之间的联系。加拿大人对CI的看法:文化体验还是政治宣传?2017重点从文化领域揭示中加关系的认知障碍。Kwok Jackson澳大利亚……有问题吗?在澳大利亚?2018聚焦澳大利亚教育体系,为全球范围内反对CI在大学校园合作的批评压力做好准备。4 Wang D.和Adamson B.中国和美国(评论基于美国)战争与和平:中国和美国的CI观点2015它试图比较中国和美国的媒体,学者,政治家和其他利益团体对CI活动的看法。5关颖昌。加拿大文化外交与高等教育国际化:加拿大三个孔子学院的经验。2013重点研究东道国大学对孔子学院作为中国文化外交和软实力的看法。美国参议院常设调查小组委员会报告《2019年美国中国对美国教育体系的影响》,重点批评在中国政府的全力支持下,孔子学院对美国高等教育的影响。与东道国和整个国家的CI透明度问题。美国大学教授协会(AAUP)的报告《北美与外国政府的伙伴关系:2014年孔子学院案例》关注的是孔子学院模仿文化大使的原则及其与其他项目(英国文化协会、法国文化协会等)类似的联合项目,但与帝国历史、地缘政治议程和软实力目标相对相关。8 Volpe M. & Quiyang L.意大利意大利媒体话语中的CI形象2016聚焦于中国战略扩张与全球形象的国际辩论以及相应的CI目标。9 Peterson R.(美国国家学者协会报告)《美国外包给中国:美国高等教育中的孔子学院和软实力》2017年,它重点关注中国政府如何在世界各地的学院和大学中种植孔子学院,提供中国语言和文化课程,在美国也有更多。英国保守党人权委员会的调查报告《中国的独联体:保守党人权委员会2019年的调查报告》试图探讨对英国高等教育中独联体的指控是积极的还是消极的影响。11 Whittaker S. Review基于《美国中国的崛起和孔子学院:中美视角2013》,它试图理解和探讨中国政府影响美国教育工作者限制学术自由的美国批评者眼中的孔子学院是如何看待的。孔子学院在中国语言和文化方面的进步表3看法、发现和前进的道路评论文章标题看法一些相关的发现一些相关的建议或结论1关于孔子学院的困惑:软实力推动还是阴谋孔子学院与中国政府在财务和组织上的联系创造了孔子学院作为中国政府宣传工具的假设。孔子学院遵守所在国法律,尊重当地文化交流。CI总部(汉办)对学习资料内容不进行干涉。孔子学院以文化外交为宗旨,让国际社会更多了解中国的发展成就。ci不会说谎或半真半假,但当涉及到某些话题时,他们会沉默或安静。加拿大人对CI的看法:文化体验还是政治宣传?文章认为,孔子学院是中国政府的一个分支机构。作为一个教育机构,CI不能遵守不受政府干预的独立原则。加拿大研究人员和团体对中国政府的CIs政治结构有不同的理解。中国政府正利用孔子学院来影响教学内容和学习内容的学术自由。中国坚持其建立的严格目的是帮助外国人学习中国语言和文化,作为建立中国和世界相互了解的一种方式。