A comparative study of the Confucius Institute in the United Kingdom and the British Council in China

Abstract

Since the first Confucius Institute was set up by the Chinese government for the promotion of Chinese language and culture overseas in 2004, the development of Confucius Institutes has become exponentially increasing. Currently, there are 29 Confucius Institutes in the United Kingdom among over 500 Confucius Institutes abroad; meanwhile, the activities of the British Council in China also became popular as one of the central paradigms for educational communication between China and the United Kingdom. Although there have been several studies on Confucius Institutes and British Council, respectively, little research exists about them from the international comparative perspective, with regard to both of them being cultural institutes abroad and the establishment of Confucius Institutes benefitting from the United Kingdom’s experience in promoting its national languages and culture. This article aims to discover the general similarities and differences between Confucius Institutes and the British Council in three aspects: the organisation structures and culture diffusion models, the language teaching and learning resources and activities, and the cooperation that the two institutes have with the other organisations.

Analysis of the Differences Between Chinese and Western Preschool Education--The Case Study of China and Finland

“…At the same time, the content of children's learning is divided into five areas and the learning objectives of each area are listed. While the Outline does not provide a detailed explanation of each area, the Guide has enriched this content [4]. According to the Guide, the five areas are health, language, social, scientific, and artistic.…”

Institutional Responses to Environmental Pressures

“…Though CIs are relatively new, China is not the first country to launch language and culture institutes in foreign countries. European nations have been establishing similar institutes since the late-1800s (Cai, 2019). The research on these institutes comes primarily from political science and uses soft power as the theoretical framework.…”

“…Soft power-a term coined by Joseph Nye (1990)-is related to a nation's ability to control the actions of others without force or coercion. While soft power can be understood in relation to environmental forces and their role in institutional decision making in higher education, it is more relevant to the understanding of countries' motivations in the formation and dispersal of CIs and similar institutes than institutions' decision to shutter them (Cai, 2019;Cichosz & Zhang, 2014;Hartig, 2012;Lien & Oh, 2014;Wilkins & Huisman, 2012). Wu and Zha (2018) proposed a new typology for analyzing the diffusion of innovations in higher education internationalization.…”