应用型本科产教融合项目质量提升的组态路径研究——基于公开文本证据的内容分析与fsQCA
Configurational Pathways to Quality Improvement in Industry-Education Integration Projects at Applied Undergraduate Institutions —A Content Analysis and fsQCA Based on Publicly Available Textual Evidence
DOI: 10.12677/ces.2026.1410833, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 王 渝:重庆工程学院数字经济与新媒体学院,重庆
关键词: 现代产业学院;产教融合;IPOO;公开文本证据;fsQCA;Modern Industry Colleges; Industry-Education Integration; IPOO; Publicly Available Textual Evidence; fsQCA
摘要: 为识别应用型本科产教融合项目质量提升的组态路径,以重庆市首批市级示范性现代产业学院为案例,基于22个项目、76份公开文本,在IPOO逻辑下结合定向内容分析与fsQCA开展比较。结果表明,五项条件及其缺失均非较高显性成熟度的单一必要条件;“企业嵌入–课程实践–持续保障协同型”为高覆盖主导组态,其总体机制方向得以保留,但三条件精确结构受边界校准影响;“治理公开证据不足–课程重构”为低覆盖异质性组态,对部分分析设定较敏感。研究识别的是公开叙事中的显性成熟度配置,而非真实成功要素的直接还原,公开文本不能替代对项目真实质量全貌的判断。
Abstract: To identify configurational pathways to higher publicly observable maturity in industry-education integration projects, this study examines 22 demonstration modern industry colleges in Chongqing using 76 publicly available texts. Directed content analysis and fsQCA were conducted within an Input-Process-Output-Outcome (IPOO) framework. No single condition or its absence is necessary for higher maturity. The main analysis identifies enterprise embedding - curriculum practice - sustained support as the dominant high-coverage configuration; sensitivity tests retain its broader mechanism direction but show that the exact three-condition structure is sensitive to conservative boundary calibration. Insufficient public governance evidence - curriculum restructuring is a low-coverage heterogeneous configuration and is sensitive to some analytical settings. The findings capture publicly observable maturity configurations in public narratives rather than actual success factors, so public texts support traceable comparison but not a complete judgment of project quality.
文章引用:王渝. 应用型本科产教融合项目质量提升的组态路径研究——基于公开文本证据的内容分析与fsQCA[J]. 创新教育研究, 2026, 14(10): 678-691. https://doi.org/10.12677/ces.2026.1410833

参考文献

[1] 高玉宝, 江琼, 宋士华. 地方应用型大学现代产业学院建设质量评价体系研究——以九江学院为例[J]. 九江学院学报(社会科学版), 2026, 45(1): 52-62.
[2] 龙涛, 汤进峰. 现代产业学院动态调适能力评价体系的设计与运用[J]. 湖北职业技术学院学报, 2026, 29(3): 46-50.
[3] Zhuang, T., Zhou, H. and Sun, Q. (2024) Ushering in Industrial Forces for Teaching-Focused University-Industry Collaboration in China: A Resource-Dependence Perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 49, 2357-2375.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2306343
[4] Zhang, Y. and Chen, X. (2023) Empirical Analysis of University-Industry Collaboration in Postgraduate Education: A Case Study of Chinese Universities of Applied Sciences. Sustainability, 15, Article No. 6252.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076252
[5] Dizon, A.G. (2023) Historical Development of CIPP as a Curriculum Evaluation Model. History of Education, 52, 109-128.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760x.2022.2098390
[6] Qin, X. and Chen, Y. (2026) Enhancing Educational Outcomes with Outcome-Based Education: A Study of Employability and Industry Readiness in Chinese Multimedia Technology Students. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 30, 2737-2765.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2025.2573011
[7] Yang, Y., Sun, Y., Lan, J. and Wang, Z. (2026) The Influencing Factors and Complex Configuration Analysis of Digital Empowerment in Ideological and Political Education in Chinese Higher Education. Asia Pacific Journal of Education.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2026.2621731
[8] 常银子, 尹丽卿, 成纪予. CIPP模式构建现代产业学院粮储专业定向生培养质量评价体系——以浙江农林大学为例[J]. 食品工业, 2026, 47(5): 187-192.
[9] Elken, M. (2024) Collaborative Design of Governance Instruments in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 49, 1095-1106.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2258905
[10] Aminah, S., Alfa Krisnadhi, A. and Nizar Hidayanto, A. (2025) Ontological Framework for the Analysis of Outcome-Based Curriculum in Higher Education. IEEE Access, 13, 31497-31516.
https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2025.3542881
[11] Cilesiz, S. and Greckhamer, T. (2020) Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Education Research: Its Current Status and Future Potential. Review of Research in Education, 44, 332-369.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x20907347
[12] O’Connor, C. and Joffe, H. (2020) Intercoder Reliability in Qualitative Research: Debates and Practical Guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220
[13] Lacy, S., Watson, B.R., Riffe, D. and Lovejoy, J. (2015) Issues and Best Practices in Content Analysis. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92, 791-811.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015607338
[14] 亓立东, 杨莉萍, 陈家敏, 张登攀, 舒梅, 李兮何. 质性研究的编码者间一致性[J]. 心理科学, 2023, 46(3): 760-767.
[15] Coleman, M.L., Ragan, M. and Dari, T. (2024) Intercoder Reliability for Use in Qualitative Research and Evaluation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 57, 136-146.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2024.2303715
[16] Ragin, C.C. (2008). Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. University of Chicago Press.
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226702797.001.0001
[17] Schneider, C.Q. and Wagemann, C. (2012) Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139004244
[18] Pappas, I.O. and Woodside, A.G. (2021) Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA): Guidelines for Research Practice in Information Systems and Marketing. International Journal of Information Management, 58, Article ID: 102310.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102310
[19] Di Paola, N., Chari, S., Iannacci, F. and Kraus, S. (2025) Configurational Theory in Business and Management Research: Status Quo and Guidelines for the Application of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 211, Article ID: 123907.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123907
[20] Wu, F. and Yang, S. (2026) Mapping Influencing Factors and Interactions in the Sustainable Development of the University Practice Education Community: A Social Network Analysis. Systems, 14, Article No. 252.
https://doi.org/10.3390/systems14030252