The Future of China's Confucius Institutes

September 30, 2014 1:48 PM

As Western universities drag their feet, the future of China’s soft power push might be in the developing world. Confucius Institutes have been under close scrutiny recently, as many academics argue the Chinese government-funded institutes wind up restricting academic freedom at their host universities. In July, the American Association of University Professors published a report blasting the Confucius Institute model as a partnership “that sacrificed the integrity of the [host] university and its academic staff.” The AAUP recommended shutting down U.S. Confucius Institutes unless they could meet certain standards of academic freedom and transparency.
posted by Nevin (9 comments total)

Here's an article in The Nation detailing some of the academic freedom concerns that have been voiced regarding the CIs.
posted by mr_roboto at 2:25 PM on September 30, 2014 [2 favorites]

Weird story.

I've never heard of the CIs before.

Based on the link, it sounds like Chicago is shutting down its institute to fight the appearance of too much influence from the Chinese government. Xu Lin, the head of the Hanban (government Chinese language and culture outreach org, which runs the CIs), made some high-handed remarks to the Chinese press about negotations with Chicago, and Chicago was apparently embarrassed. (Add to this that 100+ Chicago profs signed a letter asking the University to shut down the institute.)

Wikipedia gives some reasons to be skeptical of this program:

On April 2007 while inspecting Hanban, Li Changchun, member of the Standing Committee of the Politburo in charge of ideology and propaganda stated that: "the construction of Confucius Institutes is an important channel to glorify Chinese culture, to help Chinese culture spread to the world...(which is) part of China's foreign propaganda strategy""

The CIs are also criticized for their hiring practices. It was revealed that CI teachers are forbidden to have any in class discussion on or any involvement with topics sensitive to the Chinese regime, such as the Uyghurs, Tibet, Falun Gong, democracy advocates, etc. Canada's McMaster University terminated its contract with its CI after Sonia Zhao, former teacher at the University's CI, quit her job, and subsequently appealed to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario for the university's “giving legitimization to discrimination.” Under her job contract with the CI Ms. Zhao was forced to hide her belief in Falun Gong, a spiritual movement persecuted by the Communist party of China.

And from the Wall Street Journal:

Ms. Xu’s activities have landed the Confucius Institute in delicate situations before. In an August report, the European Association for Chinese Studies said that during its conference earlier this year – an event partly supported by the Confucius Institute Headquarters in Beijing – Ms. Xu told organizers that abstracts by some professors for papers and panels were “contrary to Chinese regulations” and ordered the materials removed.

University faculties don't want hiring and curriculums to be subject to political review, while administrations care more about the money that comes with.
posted by grobstein at 2:35 PM on September 30, 2014 [4 favorites]

(Sorry: looks like Xu Lin is not the head of Hanban but the head of the CI initiative.)
posted by grobstein at 2:37 PM on September 30, 2014

A somewhat dramatic scandal.
posted by grobstein at 2:41 PM on September 30, 2014 [2 favorites]

I wonder if A Touch of Sin is on the list of approved teaching resources?

If anyone reading here has not seen it, it is one hell of a movie. Magnificent.
posted by Nevin at 3:40 PM on September 30, 2014

Toronto District School Board trustees working toward ending partnership with Confucius Institute
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 3:53 PM on September 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

What became of accrediting organization?
posted by Postroad at 4:40 PM on September 30, 2014

Parallel to the academic freedom/chilling effect arguments against CIs (which are very real, and should be considered carefully by any institution thinking of partnering with Hanban), there's an even better reason not to bother with them: namely, that their Chinese-teaching materials are even worse than the generally dismal average, and their teachers are often young, inexperienced people who've gotten the job as a result of connections rather than teaching skills. (Often, not always -- some of them are genuinely interested in Chinese-as-a-foreign-language pedagogy.)

Hanban's a massive, corrupt organization -- they've had basically unlimited dump trucks full of money backing up to their offices on Deshengmen Wai for years, and no real oversight since nobody has been able to define what "success" would look like for them. There's been some backlash against them -- possibly related to what feels like a general flagging of interest in soft-power programs recently -- and I wonder if the high-profile case of UChicago and the much lower profile case of Penn State (which also recently decided not to renew its CI) will lead to changes in how Hanban is overseen back home.
posted by bokane at 5:35 PM on September 30, 2014 [3 favorites]

I feel very split on this issue. My rural-ness means that the state university's Confucius Institute has been a godsend for me to keep up on my Chinese study. On the other hand, the article is correct - no one would ever learn real Chinese studying from a CI. Their language teaching classes are just not that rigorous. Which leaves - what? The cultural initiatives. Sigh.
posted by chainsofreedom at 11:10 AM on October 1, 2014