Research on the global trends of higher education development helps to profoundly grasp the logic of transformation and future directions of higher education. An analytical framework is constructed from the three dimensions of dynamics, priorities, and stakeholders in higher education to analyze the development trends in major countries. This study identifies several key tendencies of higher education: a trend of talent aggregation driven by both market and international dimensions; a trend of technological competition under the dual impetus of strategy and excellence; a trend of collaborative innovation through the integration of education and industry chains; and a trend of negotiated advancement based on both internal and external logics. At present, China’s higher education development has completed the phase of “quantitative” accumulation and entered a new stage. It should focus on enhancing the capabilities of innovation development, high-quality development, and balanced development, and give full play to its leading role in building a strong education country.

Referencing an evaluation framework for a powerful education system comprising 15 indicators across four dimensions.The findings indicate that China leads in 3 indicators, is approaching America level in 3 indicators, and shows potential for further improvement to narrow the gap in 6 indicators. Based on dimensionless calculation, China’s comprehensive Education Power Index has reached 79.8% of that of America. This demonstrates the historic achievements and transformative progress in China’s educational development since the reform and opening-up, particularly since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. It is recommended to deepen comprehensive educational reform, coordinate reforms in the systems of science and technology, and talent development, integrate higher, continuing, and vocational education, and fully leverage the leading role of higher education, thereby achieving new breakthroughs in accelerating the construction of a powerful education system.

AI is increasingly demonstrating capabilities in academic writing that rival or even surpass those of humans. Consequently, to safeguard the originality and rigor of degree theses, some universities have established specific AIGC detection rates as a criterion for identifying academic misconduct. While this policy may temporarily curb the direct use of AIGC content, it is already presenting challenges such as false positives and a widening digital divide. In the long term, it could expose the inadequacy of current regulations in the face of technological progress, leading to a fundamental misalignment of regulatory boundaries. Therefore, navigating the AI era necessitates a paradigm shift guided by STIs—moving from formalistic judgment to value-based assessment, and from technological disciplining to capability development. By constructing multi-level evaluation systems, strengthening technical support, and establishing adaptive regulatory frameworks, we can accommodate the future paradigm of human-AI collaborative creation. This approach offers a new analytical framework for understanding academic innovation in the age of AIGC.

The utilization of artificial intelligence in academic thesis writing has sparked intense debates concerning the boundary between academic misconduct and legitimate innovation. Universities currently adhere to an identity verification logic centered on academic integrity, yet the prevailing approach of imposing proportional restrictions on AI use has shifted regulatory focus away from evaluating genuine academic competence toward scrutinizing textual provenance. The Law on Academic Degrees and Copyright Law exhibit a conspicuously heterogeneous relationship in regulating this issue. Functionally, the two legal frameworks diverge, with one embodying an incentive-oriented approach while the other adopts a stance of strict prohibition. In terms of regulatory logic, they conflict between prioritizing authenticity of authorship and promoting creative output. A robust framework for responsible innovation must therefore commence with establishing criteria for recognizing substantial contribution. The core evaluative standard for academic theses should transition from independent completion to demonstrable core academic contribution, complemented by a functional labeling system based on tiered disclosure to reform existing proportional limitation measures. General disclosure that is universally permitted should apply to auxiliary tool usage scenarios, supplemented with safeguards including process based assessment and reinforced dissertation defense requirements. Mandatory functional labeling subject to cautious approval should govern text generation for non-core content, thereby accumulating legal foundations for copyright claims. Strict prohibition must apply to direct AI involvement or domination of core academic contribution processes, thereby delineating an unequivocal bottom line for academic integrity.

Policy response is a precursor to policy implementation, and it has a bearing on the effectiveness of institutional reform to break the “Five Evaluation Standards”. This study uses fsQCA to explore modes of policy response. The study identifies three types of response patterns: the front-runner type, characterized by speed, practicality, and high standing; the competition-driven main force type, characterized by competitiveness, practicality, and complexity; and the silent imitating type, characterized by lagging and borrowing. Administrative leadership provides a universal impetus for policy responses, resource endowments delineate the objective capacity boundaries for institutional responses, while policy entrepreneurs emerge as the pivotal variable in stimulating agency. The interplay of these three elements collectively shapes a differentiated response pattern ranging from proactive innovation to passive inaction. Based on the findings of qualitative analysis, optimising resource allocation and fostering policy entrepreneurship represent the key pathways to guide China’s diverse higher education institutions towards differentiated response models, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of implementing policies to overcome the “Five Evaluation Standards” approach.

Entering the 21st century, to address global challenges, build regional innovation ecosystems, and resolve crises in university development, the fourth-generation university has emerged as a new paradigm. The fourth-generation university is distinguished by multi-actor collaborative innovation for regional and societal value creation, challenge-based learning that cultivates creative and socially responsible change-makers, cross-disciplinary research that integrates knowledge to address complex societal challenges, and open, tightly coupled partnerships that support a mutually beneficial innovation ecosystem. The fourth-generation university signals the future direction of global higher education and denotes a shift from academic excellence to the co-creation of societal value. By integrating education and research, deepening localized studies, and mapping collaborative geographies, these initiatives provide actionable guidance for universities to integrate into regional innovation.

The relationship between academic excellence and scholarly innovation remains a controversial topic within academia. There is a lack of systematic empirical evidence to clarify the debate. Drawing on survey data from a pilot university of the Plan for Strengthening Basic Disciplines, this study compares students with high, medium, and low levels of academic performance in terms of their innovative potential and research competence. Hierarchical regression analyses are further employed to explore the differentiated predictive effects of performance in various types of courses. The results indicate that overall academic performance is significantly and positively associated with creative thinking ability, research efficacy, and the probability of achieving research outcomes. However, the overall academic performance can barely predict creative personality traits. Moreover, performance in foundational courses strongly predicts research efficacy, whereas performance in core disciplinary courses more effectively predicts creative thinking ability and the probability of achieving research outcomes. Neither type of coursework demonstrates a significant predictive effect on creative personality traits. Based on the findings, the study proposes several targeted suggestions for university cultivation, including opening up evaluation concepts, adding assessment of personality traits, and optimizing instructional design.

The red universities founded and led by the Communist Party of China originated during the period of the Chinese Soviet Republic, developed during the full-scale War of Resistance Against Japan, and matured in the latter stages of the Liberation War. The War of Resistance period marked a crucial phase in the development of these institutions, during which three distinct types emerged: military cadre schools, political cadre schools, and specialized cadre schools. The relocation of Red Universities during the War of Resistance unfolded in two phases: the expansion and establishment phase from 1937 to 1940, and the consolidation and reinforcement phase from 1941 to 1945. Their operations were concentrated in the Yan’an, North China, and Central China bases, exhibiting distinctive characteristics in relocation direction, frequency, and geographic scope. The fundamental experiences gained by Red Universities during their relocations included flexible teaching methods, localized curriculum content, and the formalization of their operational systems. These institutions not only supplied a large number of key personnel for the War of Resistance but also, through their migratory operations, shaped the organizational prototype and cultural DNA of higher education in New China.

With the expansion of higher education and the devaluation of diplomas, the involution of educational diplomas is a concrete extension of rationalist logic within the symbolic capital valuation system of diplomas. From the perspective of consumption theory, diplomas enter the system of value production and exchange, serving as a medium to maintain the symbolic order of diplomas and establish an overarching hierarchy of differences. The root cause of the involution lies in the “opportunity agreement” promised by diplomas facing obsolescence, failing to become a “hard currency” for individuals to secure well-paying, decent jobs and instead triggering an “opportunity trap”. Under the dominance of consumption logic, diplomas as a form of opportunity currency intensify individual self-exploitation, while the excessive consumption of high diplomas highlights the differentiation of exchange value, further fueling dual concerns: anxiety over consumption value and a surge in competitive behavior. To alleviate the involution of educational diplomas, universities should face up to the phenomenon of diploma involution, correct the concept of diploma supremacy and the entrapment of consumption symbols; faculty and students need to reshape value practices, dismantling the constraints of progress ethics and consumption aesthetics; educational authorities and employers should collaborate to develop a resonant and caring education diploma ecosystem.

As a flagship initiative for advancing the European Higher Education Area, the “European Universities Alliances” has developed a classification-based collaborative mechanism characterized by institutional diversity, functional complementarity, and transnational co-governance. Through formalized selection standards, differentiated positioning frameworks, and cross-institutional governance structures, the Alliances have facilitated deep cooperation among heterogeneous universities and gradually formed stable collaborative models in areas such as joint campus development, curriculum and quality framework alignment, digital support systems, and cross-institutional governance. These measures have promoted institutional differentiation, enhanced systemic coordination, and strengthened regional competitiveness. In light of these developments, China’s classification reform in higher education should promote precise institutional positioning, build a chain-based institutional system, and strengthen collaborative governance structures, thereby improving institutional effectiveness and fostering a high-quality development pattern featuring structural optimization and systemic coordination.

The Degree Law clarifies the legal status of degree applicants, establishing the right to apply for a degree, the right to obtain a degree, and the right to hold a degree as their core rights. Although Article 41 of the Degree Law stipulates three scenarios for legal remedies—“failure to accept a degree application”,“failure to confer a degree”, and “revocation of a degree”—it remains necessary to reasonably define the requirement to “request the relevant authorities to handle the matter in accordance with the law”. Challenges in realizing degree applicants’ rights include: legislative ambiguity hindering the establishment of a normative basis for litigation; the specialized nature of academic judgments limiting the scope of admissible degree disputes; and constraints on the extent of judicial review intervention in degree disputes. Consequently, it is necessary to establish a comprehensive litigation safeguard system. Legislation should clarify the legal basis for initiating lawsuits, ensure reasonable judicial review intervention in degree disputes, and establish differentiated standards for judicial review. Additionally, complementary systems must be refined by enacting the “Implementation Measures for the Degree Law” to broaden avenues for judicial remedies.

The incorporation of criminal liability provisions into the education code ensures the integrity of the content of the education code at the formal level, and helps to promote the legal protection of citizens’ right to education at the substantive level, while at the same time providing a guarantee for the implementation of the obligatory provisions of the education law. Existing education legislation mainly builds a criminal liability system through the establishment of a special chapter on “Legal Liability”, and the criminal liability provisions set up have a strong dependency and are expressed in the form of introductory provisions. The inclusion of provisions on criminal responsibility for education in the Code faces major difficulties, such as a lack of systematization in the legislative design, insufficiently developed regulatory functions and a lack of logical connection with the educational norms of the Criminal Code. For this reason, it is appropriate to adopt the concept of constructing a composite system of criminal liability for education at the overall level, and in terms of specific design, consideration can be given to adding a general provision on criminal liability to the general provisions of the Education Code and list the specific provisions that trigger criminal liability in the specific provisions, so as to further clarify the object of invocation of the provisions on criminal liability, and at the same time to make it clear that the provisions on criminal liability will be used to protect legal interests.

In higher vocational colleges, teachers are the central human capital for training high-skill talent, and the level of their digital literacy is decisive in driving the digital overhaul of specialties and achieving high-quality growth. Based on Social Cognitive Theory, the article constructed a “personal-behavior-environment” triadic interactive framework of teachers’ digital literacy , analyzing the situation of teachers’ digital literacy in Zhejiang Higher Vocational Colleges through comprehensive qualitative interview, questionnaire survey, structural equation modeling (SEM), and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). The study found that practice behavior is the direct channel for the generation of teachers’ digital literacy; multi-condition collaboration is the key mechanism for the development of teachers’ digital literacy; and insufficient external support is the main obstacle to improving teachers’ digital literacy. Based on these findings, it is recommended to enhance teachers’ individual digital literacy self-efficacy to strengthen digital teaching behaviors; deepen school-enterprise collaborative training in higher vocational colleges to promote the realization of multi-condition collaboration; and perfect the policy and institutional guarantees for teachers’ digital literacy to amplify the effect of external support.