Multi-Stakeholder Evaluation of Dual-Qualified Humanities Teachers: A Case from a Chinese Applied University
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examines (1) multi-stakeholder perceptions of competency demand and attainment among dual-qualified humanities teachers, (2) evaluation differences among faculty, departmental leaders, and administrative staff, and (3) mechanisms of stakeholder divergence based on an original cognition–process–institution framework. Conducted at a Chinese application-oriented university in Southeast China, the study involved a total sample of N = 79, using purposive and stratified sampling. Data were collected through questionnaires and interviews and analyzed using descriptive statistics, Gap analysis, ANOVA, t-tests, and content analysis. Findings reveal significant gaps between competency demand and attainment, indicating structural imbalances in teacher development. Practical competence is the most critical deficit. Distinct role-based evaluation patterns are observed across stakeholder groups. These divergences are explained through the cognition–process–institution framework, proposed as an original integrative model of evaluation misalignment and institutional governance.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Views and opinions appearing in the Journal it is the responsibility of the author of the article, and does not constitute the view and responsibility of the editorial team.
References
Ball, S. J. (2012). Global Education Inc.: New policy networks and the neoliberal imaginary. Routledge.
Cai, H., & Xiong, K. (2018). Action learning: Cultivation pathways of teaching competence for “dual-qualified” teachers in application-oriented undergraduate universities. Heilongjiang Researches on Higher Education, 36(6), 100-104.
Chang, X. (2024). Development, challenges, and breakthrough pathways for “dual-qualified” teacher teams in vocational education under high-quality development. Vocational and Technical Education, 45(7), 58-64.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice?. European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399
Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning. Falmer.
Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/158037042000225245
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.
Liu, J., & Zhang, X. (2013). A study on the competency model of teachers in vocational colleges. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing (Social Sciences Edition), 29(6), 68-73. http://bkds.ustb.edu.cn/article/id/382e0a63-c0e9-4de0-aee8-68e7151d52da
Liu, M., Chen, Y., Yang, S., & Liu, Z. (2025). Analysis of competency components of “dual-qualified” teachers. Vocational and Technical Education, 46(1), 63-70.
Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509-536. https://www.tcrecord.org/ContentId=576
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2022). Basic standards for “dual qualified” teachers in vocational education (Trial implementation). http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A10/s7034/202210/t20221025_974047.html
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2019). Implementation plan for deepening the reform of “dual-qualified” teacher team development in the new era of vocational education (Teacher No. 6, 2019). http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A10/s7034/201910/t20191017_402762.html
National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China. (2022). Vocational education law of the People’s Republic of China (2022 revision). http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202204/a5c6e59c5e6e4ecb82e0d38eb6c101a9.shtml
OECD. (2019). A flying start: Improving initial teacher preparation systems. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/a-flying-start_cf74e549-en.html
Qin, J. (2016). Issues in the development of “dual-qualified” and “dual-competence” teacher teams in local undergraduate universities. Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education, 7(2), 135-137.
Schön, D. A. (1992). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1175860
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
Zhang, H., & Wang, H. (2022). The analysis on the construction and application of certification standard of “double-typed qualities” teachers in higher vocational colleges: Based on the investigation and analysis of 153 higher vocational colleges in 23 provinces of China. China Higher Education Research, 38(7), 103-108. https://doi.org/10.16298/j.cnki.1004-3667. 2022.07.17
Wang, T. (2023). Growth mindset model of “dual-qualified” teacher training: Theoretical construction and practical strategies. Vocational and Technical Education, 44(35), 63-70.
