This paper aims to examine various methods of Chinese character education practiced in China and to identify their characteristics and implications. As a country that has used Chinese characters as the writing system of its native language, China has accumulated extensive research and practical experience in Chinese character education over a long period of time. Based on this background, China has established the scope and hierarchy of characters to be learned at the level of the national curriculum and has developed and applied diverse instructional methods according to learners’ developmental stages and educational objectives. An analysis of these methods can provide useful insights not only for Chinese character education in Korea but also for the development of instructional methods for learners outside Chinese-speaking contexts. This paper first examines the Basic Character List for Literacy and Writing Instruction (識字寫字敎學基本字表) and the Commonly Used Character List for the Chinese Language Curriculum in Compulsory Education (義務敎育語文課程常用字表), both of which were presented by the Chinese Ministry of Education. These lists institutionalize, at the national level, the range and sequence of Chinese characters to be learned during compulsory education and serve as important standards for textbook compilation and the organization of teaching and learning content. In particular, the Commonly Used Character List presents 3,500 characters to be mastered during compulsory education, while the Basic Character List selects 300 characters that should be taught first at the initial stage of learning. This indicates that Chinese character education in China is not dependent solely on individual teachers’ experience or textbook compilers’ judgment, but is systematically organized according to national standards. The paper then discusses the content and characteristics of representative methods of Chinese character education used in China, including the Concentrated Character Recognition Method (集中識字法), Distributed Character Recognition Method (分散識字法), Phonetic-Notation-Based Character Recognition Method (注音識字法), Component-Based Character Recognition Method (部件識字法), Character-Principle-Based Character Recognition Method (字理識字法), and Root-Character-Based Character Recognition Method (字根識字法). The Concentrated Character Recognition Method emphasizes intensive learning of characters before moving on to reading instruction, whereas the Distributed Character Recognition Method enables learners to acquire characters naturally through the process of reading textbook passages. The Phonetic-Notation-Based Method connects early reading ability with character recognition by using pronunciation guides. The Component-Based and Root-Character-Based Methods make use of the structural analysis of Chinese characters, while the Character-Principle-Based Method helps learners understand the relationship among character form, sound, and meaning on the basis of the principles of character formation. Although each method has its own strengths and limitations, together they demonstrate that Chinese character education can be designed in various ways by taking into account both the structural features of Chinese characters and the learners’ level. This paper also examines cases in which digital technologies are applied to Chinese character education in China. Electronic dictionaries, digital textbooks, educational software, learning games, and video materials are widely used, contributing to greater accessibility and to the expansion of learning methods and environments. Such digital resources and platforms may also offer meaningful references for developing new teaching and learning methods in Korean Chinese character education. However, Chinese character education in China differs from that in Korea in several respects, since it presupposes an environment in which Chinese characters are used as the native writing system, employs simplified characters, and aims primarily at developing reading and writing abilities. Therefore, when applying Chinese research findings and instructional methods to Korea, it is necessary to critically reconsider them in light of the aims and conditions of Korean Chinese character education, such as the understanding of Korean vocabulary, the learning of Sino-Korean words, and education in traditional culture. Nevertheless, China’s systematic use of character lists, development of diverse character recognition methods, and active adoption of digital technologies provide significant implications for improving and expanding Chinese character education in Korea and other regions outside China.