新工科应用型人才培养“双线三阶四维”数字化智慧教学模式的构建与实践
Construction and Practice of a “Dual-Line, Three-Stage, Four-Dimensional” Digital and Intelligent Teaching Model for Cultivating Application-Oriented Talent in Emerging Engineering Education
摘要: 针对新工科课程线上线下衔接不充分、能力进阶路径不清及育人目标分散等问题,本文在建构主义、情境学习与成果导向教育基础上,构建双线融合、三阶递进、四维赋能数字化智慧教学模式。双线组织诊断与反馈,三阶安排任务复杂度和实践参与程度,四维将价值塑造、数智赋能、工程实践和研创贯通落实为任务评价要求;三者通过同一学习证据形成教学调整循环。以《机械制图及CAD》为案例,说明多元图谱、线上线下协同、实践任务链与虚实联动场景的实施方式,并讨论理论课与实践课、工科与文科的调整策略及资源、师资和技术边界。案例展示了框架的可实施路径,其学习增益和跨课程效果仍需进一步验证。
Abstract: To address the insufficient integration of online and offline instruction, unclear pathways for progressive competency development, and fragmented educational objectives in emerging engineering education, this study develops a digital and intelligent teaching model characterized by “dual-line integration, three-stage progression, and four-dimensional empowerment”, drawing on constructivism, situated learning, and outcome-based education (OBE). The dual-line approach organizes diagnosis and feedback, while the three-stage approach progressively increases task complexity and the level of practical engagement. The four-dimensional approach translates value cultivation, digital intelligence empowerment, engineering practice, and innovation and research into explicit task and assessment requirements. These three components are interconnected through a shared body of learning evidence to establish a continuous cycle of instructional adjustment. Using Mechanical Drawing and CAD as a case study, this paper illustrates the implementation of diversified knowledge and competency maps, online-offline collaboration, practice-oriented task sequences, and virtual-physical integrated learning environments. It also discusses adaptation strategies for theoretical and practical courses, as well as engineering and humanities courses, while examining the constraints imposed by resources, faculty capabilities, and technological conditions. The case demonstrates the practical implementation of the proposed framework; however, its learning gains and effectiveness across different courses require further validation.
文章引用:吴昊年, 何芳, 张军. 新工科应用型人才培养“双线三阶四维”数字化智慧教学模式的构建与实践[J]. 教育进展, 2026, 16(10): 1606-1615. https://doi.org/10.12677/ae.2026.16102267

参考文献

[1] 赵生慧, 陈桂林, 于春燕, 等. 面向应用型高校的科教融合信息类人才培养探索[J]. 滁州学院学报, 2022, 24(2): 103-107.
[2] 吴飞, 吴超, 朱强. 科教融合和产教协同促进人工智能创新人才培养[J]. 中国大学教学, 2022(Z1): 15-19.
[3] 盛明科, 杨可鑫, 牛敬丹. 高校科研成果转化为教学资源的理论逻辑与实践路径[J]. 当代教育理论与实践, 2019, 11(6): 5-10.
[4] Menekse, M. (2023) Envisioning the Future of Learning and Teaching Engineering in the Artificial Intelligence Era: Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Engineering Education, 112, 578-582.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20539
[5] Hao, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, B., Amarantidis, G. and Ghannam, R. (2025) Integrating AI in Engineering Education: A Comprehensive Review and Student-Informed Module Design for U.K. Students. IEEE Transactions on Education, 68, 173-185.
https://doi.org/10.1109/te.2025.3536105
[6] Liu, C., Wang, G. and Wang, H. (2025) The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Education: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access, 13, 17895-17910.
https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2025.3532595
[7] Abu-Salih, B. and Alotaibi, S. (2024) A Systematic Literature Review of Knowledge Graph Construction and Application in Education. Heliyon, 10, e25383.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25383
[8] Lin, W. (2023) Research on Individualized Teaching in Colleges and Universities Based on Knowledge Graph. Proceedings of the 2023 4th International Conference on Big Data and Informatization Education (ICBDIE 2023), Zhangjiajie, 7-9 April 2023, 830-835.
https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-238-5_107
[9] Abu-Rasheed, H., et al. (2025) LLM-Assisted Knowledge Graph Completion for Curriculum and Domain Modelling in Personalized Higher Education Recommendations. 2025 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), London, 22-25 April 2025, 1-5.
https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON62633.2025.11016377
[10] Jadhav, M.R., Kakade, A.B., Jagtap, S.R. and Patil, M.S. (2020) Impact Assessment of Outcome Based Approach in Engineering Education in India. Procedia Computer Science, 172, 791-796.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.113
[11] Jonassen, D.H. (1999) Designing Constructivist Learning Environments. In: Reigeluth, C.M., Ed., Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, Vol. 2, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 215-239.
[12] Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511815355
[13] Biggs, J. (1996) Enhancing Teaching through Constructive Alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347-364.
https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00138871