THE INDUSTRY–EDUCATION INTEGRATION TRAINING MECHANISM AND PRACTICE FOR PROFESSIONAL DEGREE POSTGRADUATES IN ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT ORIENTED TOWARD NEW QUALITY PRODUCTIVE FORCES
Keywords:
New quality productive forces, Engineering management, Professional degree postgraduates, Industry–education integrationAbstract
New quality productive forces have created an urgent need for the systematic restructuring of the knowledge architecture, practical competencies, and training models of engineering management professionals. Currently, the cultivation of professional degree postgraduates in engineering management is beset by core problems, including a mismatch between curriculum design and industry demands, a disconnect between practice-based teaching and authentic engineering settings, insufficient depth in university–enterprise cooperation, and an evaluation mechanism misaligned with competency orientation. To address these issues, this paper proposes strategies for constructing an industry–education integration training model for professional degree postgraduates in engineering management that is oriented toward new quality productive forces. These strategies encompass a trinity industry–education integrated curriculum system of "theoretical courses + practical courses + innovative courses," a "Four-Shared, Four-Through" university–enterprise collaborative operation mechanism, a multi-dimensional competency evaluation mechanism oriented toward practical outcomes, and the strengthening of a university–enterprise collaborative education community. Through pilot implementation and iterative refinement, a new industry–education integration ecosystem has taken shape in which "education is embedded in industry and industry is integrated with education." This training model has significantly enhanced postgraduates’ core competencies, employment quality, and industrial adaptability, offering a transferable educational reform blueprint for local universities.References
[1] Xie Xiyao, Chen Weiwei, Sun Fei, et al. Vigorously Promoting the Construction of a Modern Industrial System to Accelerate the Development of New Quality Productive Forces. Xinhua Daily Telegraph, 2024.
[2] Yang Jinwei, Liang Jiamei, Kan Baoxiao, et al. Construction Characteristics and Practical Pathways of the Quality Assurance System for Engineering Education in the United States. Research in Higher Engineering Education, 2026(02): 78–83.
[3] Lin Yaqiong, Dong Zishuo. Between Academia and Industry: A Case Study of Engineering Graduate Training at MIT from the Perspective of Entrepreneurial Science. University and Discipline, 2025, 6(01): 98–114.
[4] Lei Huan, Edward Crawley. Cultivating Engineering Leadership to Lead Global Development: An Overview of the MIT Gordon Engineering Leadership Program. Tsinghua Journal of Education, 2010, 31(01): 77–83+92.
[5] Zhang Jingxiao, Liu Xin, Liu Jiayu, et al. Teaching Design and Practice for Engineering Management Majors in Engineering Practice Scenarios: A Case Study of MEM Postgraduates at Chang’an University. Research in Higher Engineering Education, 2026(03): 159–64.
[6] General Office of the State Council. Several Opinions on Deepening Industry–Education Integration. Gazette of the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, 2017(12): 2–9.
[7] National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council. Notice on Issuing the Pilot Implementation Plan for National Industry–Education Integration Construction. Gazette of the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, 2019(10): 15, 1–9.
[8] Leading Group for Education Work of the CPC Central Committee. Action Plan for Adjusting and Optimizing the Setting of Higher Education Disciplines (2025–2027). Chinese Talent, 2025(09): 5.