An Exploration on the Value Appeal and Practice Path of University Governance Under the Context of Good Governance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Good governance is a crucial concept in the field of economic and social management. In recent years, it has been increasingly used in the country’s public organization governance, and according to it to explore the governance path of the public sector. University is a knowledge-based public organization. The proposal of university good governance derived from social good governance and state good governance. This article holds that under the context of good governance, the university governance takes justice and efficiency as its value choice. Its legitimacy, rule of law, transparency and other practical appeals will help to promote running a school fairly. At the same time, its accountability, responsiveness and inclusiveness is also important to ensure the generation of efficiency. Based on this, the article further proposes the path to achieve university good governance. That is to build modern university system, strengthen information disclosure, set up dialogue platform, and improve the corporate governance structure and so on.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it