Students as partners in China: Investigating the potentials and possibilities for growing practices across universities
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
There is a small but growing body of literature about engaging students as partners (SaP) in Asian countries. To further collective understanding of learner-teacher partnership practices in China, we invited undergraduate students and academics from three Chinese universities to complete a survey on their involvement in, and sense of importance of, 17 practices that align with SaP activities. The 402 students and 85 academic staff who engaged in the survey reported high levels of agreement about the importance of such practices that foster learner-teacher interactions although levels of involvement were lower. The findings demonstrate that SaP practices are unfolding in Chinese universities with evidence of a desire for growth of such activities. Our findings reveal potentials and possibilities for growing such practices in Chinese universities while raising questions about the underlying drivers and values motivating increased interest in learner-teacher interactions that warrant further qualitative research.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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