Fellow Reflections: Amalia Torrecillas, part 2
By Amalia Torrecillas (Spring 2026 Teaching Fellow, Fall 2025 Seminar Fellow)
This past academic year, I had the opportunity to participate in the China at CUNY Initiative (CACI), an experience that has been deeply enriching both intellectually and pedagogically. For me, the fellowship contributed to two central areas of growth: first, it introduced me to China studies as a new and important area of knowledge connected to my broader research interests; and second, it gave me new tools to think more intentionally about teaching, mentorship, and classroom engagement.
One of the most valuable aspects of CACI was that it allowed me to approach China not simply as a separate area of study, but as a topic that can be connected to broader questions in political science, public policy, international relations, and comparative political development. Through the seminar discussions, guest speakers, and conversations with fellows and faculty mentors, I was able to think more critically about China’s political institutions, its model of governance, and its growing role in the international system. This was especially meaningful for me because my own research interests center on inequality, public policy, welfare, and the relationship between institutions and marginalized communities. CACI helped me see how China studies can open new comparative questions about state capacity, governance, legitimacy, development, and social policy. In this sense, the fellowship expanded my intellectual framework and encouraged me to think beyond the cases and regions I usually work on.
CACI also had a direct impact on my teaching. As a second-year Ph.D. student and instructor, I am still developing my pedagogical identity, and the fellowship gave me a space to think carefully about what it means to teach complex political topics in an accessible and engaging way. The mentorship and feedback I received helped me design class activities that did not simply present China as an external case, but invited students to actively compare political systems and reflect on broader questions of democracy, meritocracy, legitimacy, accountability, and governance. In my own teaching, I incorporated China studies through an activity comparing U.S. federal democracy with China’s model of political meritocracy, drawing on Daniel Bell’s work. The goal was not for students to decide which system was “better,” but to help them identify the institutional trade-offs that different political systems make.
The mentorship component of CACI was especially important for this process. The program did not only provide content knowledge; it also created a collaborative space where fellows could discuss how to translate that knowledge into teaching. This helped me think more deeply about pedagogy as a form of intellectual work. I learned that teaching China studies requires more than adding China as a topic to an existing syllabus. It requires designing activities that help students question assumptions, compare political systems carefully, and understand China in relation to broader global and historical debates.
Overall, CACI has been an important part of my development as both a scholar and an educator. It expanded my research imagination by introducing me to new comparative questions, and it strengthened my teaching by helping me design more interactive, student-centered, and analytically rigorous classroom activities. The fellowship also gave me access to a supportive intellectual community of mentors, faculty, and peers whose feedback helped me grow with more confidence. I leave the program with a deeper appreciation for China studies, a stronger commitment to comparative teaching, and a clearer sense of how pedagogy can be used to help students think critically about politics beyond familiar frameworks.
0 Comments