从“孤岛”到“生态”：新材料领域继续教育政校企协同育人重构

From “Isolated Islands” to “Ecosystem”: Restructuring Government-Enterprise-University Collaborative Continuing Education in New Materials Field

摘要: 新材料产业技术迭代速度快、岗位复合技能要求持续提升，在岗专业技术人员知识更新、技能升级需求迫切。继续教育作为在职从业者持续提升专业能力的核心渠道，亟需依靠“政–企–校”协同育人模式完成体系重构。本文依托三重螺旋协同治理理论，剖析当前新材料继续教育协同育人存在政策落地不畅、企业参与积极性不足、院校教学供给与行业需求脱节三大现实问题，指出问题根源在于多方主体育人目标存在分歧、行业岗位需求信息传递不通畅、协同育人配套管理制度不完善。在此基础上，提出“协同赋能”的理论框架，即政府统筹完善配套政策、搭建一体化育人服务平台；企业输出真实岗位需求、提供一线实践实训场地；高校负责行业定制化课程开发、全过程教学质量管控。三方依托资源整合、信息互通、利益共享形成稳定育人合力，并从配套制度完善、分层育人平台搭建、多元教学评价改革三个维度提出落地优化路径。

Abstract: The new materials field features rapid technological iteration and rising requirements for composite professional skills, creating an urgent demand for knowledge renewal and skill upgrading among on-the-job professional technicians. As a core channel for in-service practitioners to continuously improve their professional competence, continuing education needs systematic restructuring through government-enterprise-university collaborative education. Based on the Triple Helix collaborative governance theory, this paper analyzes three prominent challenges in current collaborative continuing education for the new materials sector: poor policy implementation, insufficient corporate enthusiasm for participation, and disconnection between university teaching supply and industrial demands. It attributes these challenges to divergent educational goals among stakeholders, inefficient transmission of job demand information, and incomplete supporting management systems for collaborative education. On this basis, the paper proposes a theoretical framework of “synergistic empowerment”, in which government improves supporting policies and builds integrated education service platforms; enterprises deliver real job demands and provide frontline training venues; universities develop customized industry courses and manage full-cycle teaching quality. The three parties generate stable educational synergy via resource integration, information exchange and benefit sharing. Targeted optimization paths are proposed from three dimensions: improving supporting systems, building multi-level education platforms, and reforming diversified teaching evaluation systems.