论文部分内容阅读
世界上工程教育认证的协议最具有影响力的有三个,即《华盛顿协议》、《悉尼协议》和《都柏林协议》。人才培养规格是以人才培养标准的方式呈现。作为“三大”工程教育国际互认协议之一的《悉尼协议》为工程技术员的工程教育机构提供了标准。反观我国工程教育人才培养规格现状,不仅内容缺乏统一标准,科学性和合理性也存在一些偏差,人才培养过程中的主导地位和实效性价值体现的模糊不清。这种情况特别是高职教育领域表现的更为明显,在制定高职人才培养方案时也可学习和借鉴《悉尼协议》中的人才培养方式和理念,来完善高职教育的专业建设,使高职教育培养出更适合企业、社会所需专业人才,推动我国高职教育的科学发展。
There are three most influential agreements in engineering education in the world, namely “Washington Agreement”, “Sydney Agreement” and “Dublin Agreement”. Talent training specifications are based on personnel training standards presented. The Sydney Accord, which is one of the “three major” international agreements on engineering education, provides standards for engineering and educational institutions in engineering. In contrast, the status quo of engineering education personnel training in our country not only lacks a unified standard, but there are also some discrepancies in the scientific and reasonable aspects. The dominance and actual value in the process of personnel training reflect the ambiguity. This situation is especially evident in the field of higher vocational education. In the course of formulating the training program for higher vocational education, it is also possible to learn and draw upon the methods and concepts of personnel training in the Sydney Agreement so as to improve the professional development of higher vocational education so that Higher vocational education to train more suitable for business, social professionals needed to promote the scientific development of our higher vocational education.