Professor Wu Minghua stressed breaking institutional barriers among affiliated hospitals to achieve in-depth collaboration in talent deployment, standardized professional training, clinical research and industry standard formulation. She proposed a dual-track training model that balances professional degree education and case-based teaching.
Professor Wang Peichang focused on improving undergraduate training quality. He suggested arranging internships at top national tertiary general hospitals to guarantee qualified supervisors for undergraduate thesis guidance, optimize the training system, increase the proportion of clinical adjunct faculty, assign core courses to clinical teachers, and select outstanding instructors as course leaders.
From the perspective of interdisciplinary talent cultivation, Professor Xu Yingchun recommended recruiting supervisors with clinical, scientific research, industrial and humanities backgrounds to form a multi-mentor system under overall school-level coordination, and exploring pathways for academic system reform such as shortened study durations.
Professor Ou Qishui highlighted the cultivation of landmark scholars and landmark research achievements, the development of national-level research platforms, and the innovation of teaching characteristics as well as assessment methods for teaching quality and learning outcomes.
Professor Chen Tingmei proposed integrating clinical resources and establishing collaborative medical-education mechanisms, exploring interdisciplinary integration of laboratory testing and clinical medicine, and drawing on Professor Yang Zhenglin’s experience in disciplinary development.
Professor Lü Jianxin advised benchmarking against leading peer institutions, fully engaging distinguished alumni, prioritizing elite talent training as a core initiative, applying to the university for expanded undergraduate, master’s and doctoral enrollment, and launching continuous integrated training programs. He also called for breaking institutional constraints to deepen teaching reform and expand innovation output.
Capturing opportunities brought by artificial intelligence, Professor Xing Jinliang addressed key topics including restructuring knowledge frameworks, forward-looking training in medical thinking and core professional skills, clarifying student positioning and fostering distinctive disciplinary strengths. He also encouraged defining the full scope and extended frontiers of laboratory medicine.
Professor Wang Xuefeng advocated expanding beyond the traditional scope of laboratory testing, learning from successful practices of peer universities, developing overseas student programs including joint training models such as the 4+1 program, strengthening university-industry cooperation by recruiting industrial mentors, supporting student innovation and entrepreneurship, and tapping alumni resources.
Professor Xie Xinyou suggested stepping up implementation efforts, clarifying clear development pathways, and leveraging evaluation mechanisms to drive tangible reform outcomes.
Professor Zheng Hui proposed introducing Xiangya’s proven teaching experience and management models to the new department.
Professor Zhou Hongwei emphasized cultivating innovative thinking starting at the undergraduate stage.
Professor Zhou Zhou recommended consolidating interdisciplinary strengths and collaborating with hospitals to host influential academic conferences and advance key research areas.
Professor Zhou Qin called for training both technical specialists and laboratory medicine professionals, drawing on advanced practices from Hong Kong, China and Sweden.
Professor Li Bo suggested inspiring innovative thinking from freshman year, capitalizing on medical-engineering interdisciplinary strengths, boosting external publicity, and encouraging student participation in national academic competitions.
Professor Wang Chuanxin highlighted academic system reform, building signature disciplinary brands, refining core research focuses, advancing high-quality education with prestigious faculty and institutional resources, and forming a development framework featuring one core strength and one distinctive specialty per discipline.
