设计专业学位研究生培养质量评价体系构建研究
Research on the Construction of a Quality Evaluation System for Postgraduates with Professional Degrees in Design
DOI: 10.12677/ces.2026.147505, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 周楚轶, 陶 冶*, 边 泽：浙大城市学院艺术与考古学院，浙江 杭州
关键词: 设计专业学位；研究生教育；质量评价体系；德尔菲法；Professional Degree in Design； Graduate Education； Quality Evaluation System； Delphi Method
摘要: 针对设计专业学位研究生评价体系不完备的问题，本研究基于CIPP模型与“应用导向与学术探索并重”理念，构建了科学的培养质量评价体系。通过运用德尔菲法对20位专家开展两轮咨询，并经统计学检验(Kendall’s W = 0.402, P < 0.01)证实专家意见高度一致，最终确立了包含4个一级(培养过程、成果、环境、基础)、12个二级及40个三级指标的评价体系。该体系突出了“过程管理”与“产出导向”，契合设计学科特殊规律，并彰显了评价导向由校内考核向行业认可与社会效益转变的趋势。本研究为培养单位提供了量化诊断工具，有助于提升高层次应用型设计人才的培养质量。
Abstract: In response to the incomplete evaluation system for professional degree graduate students in design, this study constructs a scientific evaluation framework for cultivation quality based on the CIPP model and the educational philosophy of “emphasizing both application orientation and academic exploration”. Utilizing the Delphi method, two rounds of consultation were conducted with 20 experts. Statistical analysis (Kendall’s W = 0.402, P < 0.01) confirmed a high degree of consensus among the experts, ultimately establishing an evaluation framework comprising 4 primary indicators (cultivation process, outcomes, environment, and foundation), 12 secondary indicators, and 40 tertiary indicators. This system highlights “process management” and “outcomes orientation”, aligning with the specific characteristics of the design discipline. Furthermore, it reflects a paradigm shift in evaluation focus from internal institutional assessment toward industry recognition and social impact. This research provides educational institutions with a quantitative diagnostic tool, contributing to the enhancement of the cultivation quality for high-level, applied design talents.
文章引用：周楚轶, 陶冶, 边泽. 设计专业学位研究生培养质量评价体系构建研究[J]. 创新教育研究, 2026, 14(7): 191-201. https://doi.org/10.12677/ces.2026.147505

参考文献

[1] 刘晓敏, 刘慧娟, 武俊丽, 等. 高等院校第三方人才培养质量评价体系的研究[J]. 中国管理信息化, 2017, 20(6): 231-232.
[2] 何锡辉, 王涵, 王睿. 人才培养质量多主体联动评价路径研究[J]. 黑龙江高教研究, 2015(4): 38-40.
[3] 牛丽军. 高等教育大众化背景下的质量评价主体研究[J]. 西部素质教育, 2016, 2(18): 19+25.
[4] 丁哲学, 沈杨. 关于应用技术大学人才培养质量雇主评价的思考[J]. 教育探索, 2015(6): 72-76.
[5] 沈杨. 应用技术大学人才培养质量雇主评价研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨理工大学, 2015.
[6] 彭建章, 李兰涛, 宣兆卫, 等. 以就业和社会适应性为视角的高校人才培养质量社会评价调查研究[J]. 中国大学生就业, 2012(22): 30-36.
[7] Leko Šimić, M. and Čarapić, H. (2008) Education Service Quality of a Business School: Former and Current Students’ Evaluation. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 5, 181-191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[8] Pettit, J. (1991) Listening to Your Alumni: One Way to Assess Academic Outcomes.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED337098.pdf
[9] Pike, G.R. (1994) The Relationship between Alumni Satisfaction and Work Experiences. Research in Higher Education, 35, 105-123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[10] Levenson, A. (2011) Using Targeted Analytics to Improve Talent Decisions. People and Strategy, 34, 34.
[11] 潘敏莉, 王志坚, 翁一冰, 单青. 品管圈教学模式在助产士实习教学中应用的效果研究[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2019, 35(14): 1104-1108.
[12] 杨晨美子, 李爱彬, 范宇琪. 专业学位研究生增值评价的价值意蕴, 指标体系及实现路径——以学生发展为中心的视角[J]. 研究生教育研究, 2024(1): 94-102.
[13] 尹传忠, 郎铮煜, 邱慧妍, 等. 新工科人才培养的STCP创新模式探讨——基于学科竞赛视角下因子分析法的例证[J]. 中国高校科技, 2021(11): 69-73.
[14] 刘冰. 基于层次分析法的高职创新创业人才培养评价指标体系研究[J]. 中阿科技论坛(中英文), 2020(10): 164-166.
[15] 郝慧娟. 管理学理论在高校应用型人才培养实践中的应用[J]. 长春教育学院学报, 2014, 30(6): 20-21.
[16] 王琴, 张淑莲. 因子分析在人才培养质量评价指标体系构建中的应用[J]. 河北师范大学学报: 教育科学版, 2008(9): 141-144.
[17] 洪梅香, 贺珍瑞. 基于AHP的旅游人才培养质量评价体系的构建[J]. 经济研究导刊, 2011(3): 173-174.
[18] 吴海瑛. “PDCA”工程造价专业人才培养质量评价体系研究[J]. 价值工程, 2014, 33(1): 266-267.
[19] 文园期. “理工教融合”化学化工人才培养模式之人才质量评价研究——以湖南师范大学化学化工学院为例[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 长沙: 湖南师范大学, 2014.
[20] Warren, S.J., Boston Vogt, E., Tincher, B. and Yang, J. (2025) Enhancing Quality Assurance through Strategic Artificial Intelligence Integration: A Framework for Higher Education Digital Transformation. Quality Assurance in Education, 34, 205-222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[21] Freeman, R.E. (2010) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[22] Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. and Wood, D.J. (1997) Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22, 853-886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[23] Jongbloed, B., Enders, J. and Salerno, C. (2008) Higher Education and Its Communities: Interconnections, Interdependencies and a Research Agenda. Higher Education, 56, 303-324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[24] Harvey, L. and Stensaker, B. (2008) Quality Culture: Understandings, Boundaries and Linkages. European Journal of Education, 43, 427-442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[25] McClelland, D.C. (1973) Testing for Competence Rather than for “Intelligence”. American Psychologist, 28, 1-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Gulikers, J.T.M., Bastiaens, T.J. and Kirschner, P.A. (2004) A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52, 67-86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[27] Stufflebeam, D.L. (2000) The CIPP Model for Evaluation. Springer, 279-317.
[28] Stufflebeam, D.L. (1971) The Relevance of the CIPP Evaluation Model for Educational Accountability.
[29] Stufflebeam, D.L. and Zhang, G. (2017) The CIPP Evaluation Model: How to Evaluate for Improvement and Accountability. Guilford Publications.
[30] Carless, D. and Boud, D. (2018) The Development of Student Feedback Literacy: Enabling Uptake of Feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 1315-1325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[31] Hill, Y., Lomas, L. and MacGregor, J. (2003) Students’ Perceptions of Quality in Higher Education. Quality Assurance in Education, 11, 15-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[32] Orr, S. and Shreeve, A. (2018) Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum. Routledge.
[33] Smith, J.S. (2017) Assessing Creativity: Creating a Rubric to Effectively Evaluate Mediated Digital Portfolios. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 72, 24-36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 

为你推荐