This paper focuses on the construction and application of digital platforms, exploring perspectives and practices of teaching innovation in higher education within the digital era. It examines the new transformations in teaching, the fresh impetus of information technology in driving educational innovation, and the innovative integration of information technology and teaching. By elucidating the connotations and applications of emerging artificial intelligence technologies, such as large language models, this paper identifies a future trend toward expanding teaching innovation into new horizons. It recommends continuously optimizing platform functions, fully leveraging the role of digital platforms, upgrading the application of new technologies, generating innovative teaching service models, and building a smart education ecosystem that integrates formal education with lifelong learning in a ubiquitous learning environment.

In the big science era, incentive mechanisms that enable researchers to fully realize their potential, enhance collaboration, and improve the efficiency of organized research have remained a key issue in research governance. Based on game theory, this study compared the operational logic and incentive effects of different incentive mechanisms in organized research settings and theoretically summarizes the inherent logic of institutional optimization. By examining recent international practices in scientific authorship, this study found that traditional incentive systems, represented by authorship ranking and the first-author convention, are rigid in structure and fail to adapt to the complexity and dynamics of collaborative research, resulting in systemic underinvestment by individual researchers. However, establishing adaptive, dynamic, contribution-driven mechanisms and fostering competition within collaborative frameworks can effectively mitigate efficiency losses. Policy recommendations include learning from international experiences such as the Contributor Roles Taxonomy and promoting transparent, objective, and standard disclosure of individual contributions, thereby developing a contribution-oriented diversified talent evaluation system. It is imperative to adhere to a people-centered value orientation, promote the spirit of selfless dedication—“success does not need to be attributed to me”—and foster a collaborative innovation ecosystem.

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) encompasses the systematic education of interdisciplinary talent with innovative spirit and practical skills, spanning from basic education to higher education. Current STEM education in China is thriving at the basic education level, while higher education is increasingly focusing on STEM talent cultivation. Drawing on empirical research from the Yangtze River Delta Education Modernization Monitoring and Evaluation Project, this study integrated technologies, including large language models, to build a holistic analysis model for STEM talent cultivation in Chinese higher education. The model enables a systematic analysis of the scale of STEM talent cultivation, disciplinary structure, regional differences, and development trends in Chinese higher education institutions (HEIs). Evidently, there is an urgent need for China to establish a holistic planning framework for STEM education. It is necessary to implement initiatives to enhance the quality of STEM talent cultivation, guide regions and HEIs in adopting differentiated development paths, and establish a monitoring, evaluation, and guidance system for STEM talent cultivation. These endeavors can provide robust talent support for building a leading country in education.

The coordinated development of regional higher education has become a strategic foundation for building a leading country in education and advancing regional modernization. Promoting the coordinated development of regional higher education is a complex and often contradictory process shaped by multiple institutional logics. The Chinese central government demonstrates a dual approach by promoting regional connectivity and cooperation while encouraging local competition. Local governments strive to maximize their own interests, oscillating between cooperation and competition. Public higher education institutions (HEIs) are constrained by the centralized higher education governance system, lacking sufficient motivation to engage in regional cooperation. To achieve high-quality coordinated development of regional higher education, it is essential to address local government competition and reform government-HEI relations. This requires institutional innovation in governance at the central-local and state-society levels. Key pathways for promoting the coordinated development of regional higher education include incorporating such development into the performance assessment metrics for local governments, enhancing the coordination mechanisms of the central government for regional higher education cooperation, expanding the operational autonomy of public HEIs to increase regional cooperation opportunities, and encouraging social entities to actively participate in the coordinated development of regional higher education.

Institutional construction and improvement are crucial for achieving higher education governance modernization. This study discussed the importance of modernizing higher education governance and provided theoretical interpretations of the concept of institutions, elucidating the logical relationship between institutions and higher education governance. It proposed that governance entities be advised to strengthen their rational understanding of the important role institutions play in higher education governance. Furthermore, it highlighted the imperative for the government to improve the basic institutional construction that fosters macro higher education governance modernization. Universities are supposed to focus on strengthening institutional construction and improvement that align with their essential attributes and core missions. This study concluded by exploring action options for achieving higher education governance modernization based on the perspective of institutional rationality.

The present stage witnesses China embarking on a new stage of integrated and systematic restructuring of higher education within urban agglomerations. At the new developmental stage, China’s restructuring of higher education layouts within urban agglomerations encounters opportunities, such as more explicit national policy orientations and significant enhancements in the country’s comprehensive strength, competitiveness, and global influence. Concurrently, it confronts challenges including pronounced regional discrepancies in higher education layouts, demanding structural reforms necessitated by digital transformation, and an urgent need to elevate levels of independent talent cultivation while addressing locale-constrained development due to outdated higher education administrative mechanisms. Based on this, it is essential for China to clarify the characteristics defining the restructuring of higher education layouts within urban agglomerations. Systematic target designs are recommended to be conducted adhering to goals of expanding the foundation, optimizing the main structure, and fortifying the apex, thereby transitioning strategically from a focus on prioritized layouts toward a well-balanced and proportionate development strategy. Specifically, this study identified the following key initiatives: (1) scientifically planning the reconstructuring of regional higher education layouts while endorsing evidence-based governmental decision-making at all levels; (2) aligning with emergent trends in demographic structures and industrial distributions to establish innovative models for regional higher education systems; (3) adjusting higher education enrollment ratio metrics thoughtfully, reflecting trends in its universalization and localized emphasis; (4) leveraging the framework of 19 national urban agglomerations to develop stratified educational hubs; (5) fortifying advanced talent cultivation with a particular focus on nurturing innovation-oriented doctoral candidates; and (6) actively revising the structures of disciplines and programs to align with the evolving demands of socioeconomic progress.