Research on the Design of Quality Evaluation System of Vocational Education Industry-Teaching Integration Based on Hierarchical Analysis Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the continuous promotion of the integration of industry and education, constructing a quality evaluation system for the integration of industry and education in vocational education has become a key issue to improve the level of vocational colleges and universities' curricula.Based on the CIPP model, the article builds a quality evaluation system of vocational education industry-teaching integration that includes 4 first-level indicators, 12 second-level indicators and 34 third-level indicators, and empirically analyzes the quality of industry-teaching integration in three higher vocational colleges, H1, H2 and H3, using the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method through the questionnaire survey from the viewpoint of empirical application.According to the results of the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, the quality of industry-teaching integration in H1 and H2 higher vocational colleges and universities belongs to the good level, and its comprehensive judgment value is 78.2 and 78.395 respectively.The comprehensive judgment value of the quality of industry-teaching integration in H3 higher vocational colleges and universities is 82.037, which belongs to the excellent level.The three sample higher vocational colleges have achieved outstanding results in the integration of industry and education, providing an example for the development of integration of industry and education for higher vocational colleges in the region.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".