长摘要｜走向世界中心的中国职业教育：模式创新与体系完善

长摘要

全球工业变革与数字绿色转型推动各国职业教育体系深度重构，德国依托“职业教育4.0”迭代双元制、欧盟出台数字教育行动计划补齐技能人才缺口，全球职业教育发展格局迎来重塑。目前，国内多聚焦产教融合、数字化建设或国际化输出单一主题展开研究，尚缺少整体性分析框架，难以系统阐释中国职业教育从规模第一迈向全球引领的内在发展逻辑。立足全球职业教育变革背景，文章站在国家视角，运用定量与定性相结合的方法，构建“模式创新—体系升级—国际进阶”的分析框架，系统剖析中国职业教育转型发展的动力、创新实践、现存短板与优化路径。

文章指出，经过长期本土化探索，中国已建成全球规模最大、层级完整的现代职业教育体系，形成中职、高职专科、职业本科纵向贯通的独立育人赛道。职业教育每年向全社会输送千万级技术技能人才，覆盖先进制造、现代服务等关键产业领域，同步开展大规模社会培训，为产业升级、乡村振兴、“一带一路”国际产能合作提供稳定人才支撑，成为落实国家重大发展战略的关键支撑。在此基础上，中国形成区别于西方职业教育体系的创新模式，构成核心竞争优势。其一为“纵横联动”的产教融合新模式：横向以市域产教联合体锚定地方产业园区，联动地方政府、院校、市场主体共建区域人才培育生态，破解传统校企合作“校热企冷”难题；纵向依托行业产教融合共同体，串联产业链上下游，统筹人才培养、技术攻关、专业标准研制，构建政府引导、市场驱动、多方共担利益的协同发展格局；其二是数据驱动的全域数字化治理模式：依托国家级职业教育智慧教育平台搭建一体化数字资源生态，建立专业动态预警调整机制，依靠招生、就业、产业需求实时数据动态裁撤落后专业、增设新兴产业相关专业，实现人才供给与产业需求精准适配，走出区别于欧美市场化分散数字平台的举国统筹数字化道路。其三是标准化、品牌化国际化输出路径：以“鲁班工坊”为海外落地载体，坚持平等合作、因地制宜原则输出中国职教设备、课程与技术标准；依托世界职业技术教育发展大会发布《天津共识》，推进面向全球的职业教育质量认证，协助合作国自主构建本土职业标准，主动参与全球职教治理规则制定。

文章认为，模式创新的落地，依托了分层适配、多方协同的现代化职教完整体系。一是完善纵向贯通、横向融通的层级结构。2022年修订《职业教育法》从法律层面确立职业教育与普通教育同等重要，打通中职、高职、职业本科一体化升学通道；以综合高中、职普融通试点班推进横向融通，落实学分互认、普职双向转学制度，破除职业教育是“断头教育”的固有局限。二是搭建多元主体协同现代化治理体系。公办院校为办学主体、民办院校补充教育供给，企业深度参与人才培养并投入实训设备；持续稳定的财政投入、全覆盖学生资助体系、系统化双师型教师培育认定机制，为职业教育高质量发展筑牢资源保障根基。三是建立适配区域、产业、外交战略的差异化布局体系。东部区域重点布局高新产业相关专业，中部深耕先进制造，西部依托职教承接产业转移，东北聚焦现代农业与传统工业升级；依靠专业动态调整机制快速响应国家战略性新兴产业人才需求；面向东盟、中亚、非洲制定差异化鲁班工坊布局与合作方案，将职业教育深度融入对外开放整体布局。

文章同时认为，当前中国职业教育向全球引领迈进尚且存在深层次的发展桎梏：一是系统性协同的短板，区域职教发展差距显著，产教融合利益风险共担机制尚不完善，鲁班工坊等国际品牌本土化适配性有待提升；二是内涵提质的短板，“双高计划”优质办学经验可复制性有待提升，数字化建设多停留在资源存储展示等工具层面，职普融通学分互认、学籍流转配套制度落地尚存在堵点，双师队伍校企双向流动编制、薪酬壁垒尚未完全破除；三是平台效能的短板，国家智慧教育平台智能研判、个性化教学服务功能发展相对滞后，世界职业院校技能大赛、世界职业技术教育发展大会的成果未能有效转化为日常教学内容与多边合作制度。

面向全球职教变革新趋势，文章对应提出如下优化路径：一是完善跨区域、跨行业协同机制，打造利益共享的产教融合实体，针对欠发达县域实施精准职教帮扶，推进国际合作模式深度本土化改造；二是健全“双高计划”经验辐射推广机制，深化项目化、数字化课程教学改革，打通职普融通制度壁垒，优化双师校企双向流动配套政策；三是迭代智慧教育平台智能服务能力，建立赛事、大会成果常态化教学转化机制，依托国际会议提升中国在全球职业教育领域的议程设置与规则塑造能力。

中国职业教育迈向世界中心是教育、产业、制度协同演进的长期过程，唯有持续深化制度创新、数字化改革、全球治理参与，才能持续破解发展瓶颈，为全球技能人才培养提供可借鉴的中国实践方案。

Long Abstract

Global industrial transformation and digital-green transition have driven profound restructuring of vocational education systems worldwide. Germany has upgraded its dual training system through initiatives such as Vocational Education 4.0, while the European Union has rolled out the Digital Education Action Plan to fill the shortage of skilled personnel, reshaping the landscape of global vocational education development. Currently, domestic research mostly centers on isolated themes including industry-education integration, digital development or international export, lacking an integrated analytical framework to systematically interpret the internal logic of how China’s vocational education has evolved from the world’s largest scale to a global leader. Against the backdrop of worldwide vocational education reforms, this paper adopts a national strategic perspective, combines quantitative and qualitative research methods, and constructs an analytical framework of "Model Innovation – System Upgrading – International Advancement". It systematically dissects the driving forces, innovative practices, existing bottlenecks and optimization paths behind the transformation of China’s vocational education.

The paper argues that through long-term localized exploration, China has established the world’s largest and hierarchically complete modern vocational education system, forming an independent talent training track with vertical articulation among secondary vocational education, higher vocational colleges and vocational undergraduate education. Every year, vocational education delivers millions of technical and skilled talents to all sectors of society, covering core industries such as advanced manufacturing and modern services. Meanwhile, it carries out large-scale social training, providing steady talent support for industrial upgrading, rural revitalization and international production capacity cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative, and serving as a fundamental pillar for delivering major national development strategies. On this basis, China has developed innovative models distinct from Western vocational education systems, which constitute its core competitive edges. First, a new vertical-horizontal linkage model of industry-education integration: horizontally, municipal industry-education consortia are anchored in local industrial parks, linking local governments, schools and market entities to build regional talent training ecosystems and resolve the long-standing dilemma of "enthusiastic schools yet passive enterprises" in traditional school-enterprise cooperation. Vertically, cross-industry industry-education integration communities connect upstream and downstream industrial chains, coordinating talent cultivation, technological research and development, and the formulation of professional standards, so as to form a collaborative development pattern guided by the government, driven by the market and with shared interests among multiple stakeholders. Second, a data-driven full-scale digital governance model: relying on the national smart education platform for vocational education, an integrated digital resource ecosystem has been built. A dynamic early warning and adjustment mechanism for majors is put in place. Supported by real-time data on student enrollment, employment and industrial demands, outdated majors are phased out while majors catering to emerging industries are newly added, realizing precise matching between talent supply and industrial needs. This has forged a nationwide coordinated digital development path that differs from scattered market-oriented digital platforms in Europe and America. Third, a standardized and branded international export path: Luban Workshops serve as overseas implementation carriers. Adhering to the principles of equal cooperation and localized adaptation, China exports vocational education equipment, curricula and technical standards. Drawing on the World Vocational and Technical Education Development Conference, the Tianjin Consensus has been issued to advance global vocational education quality certification. China assists partner countries in developing indigenous vocational standards and takes an active part in formulating global vocational education governance rules.

The paper holds that the implementation of model innovation relies on a complete modern vocational education system featuring hierarchical adaptation and multi-stakeholder coordination. Firstly, a vertically connected and horizontally integrated hierarchical structure has been refined. The revised Vocational Education Law of the People’s Republic of China (2022) legally confirms that vocational education carries equal importance with general education, opening up an integrated further education channel spanning secondary vocational education, higher vocational colleges and vocational undergraduate education. Comprehensive high schools and vocational-general integrated pilot classes facilitate horizontal integration, implement mutual credit recognition and two-way student transfer between vocational and general education, breaking the inherent stereotype that vocational education is a terminal track with no upward pathways. Secondly, a modern collaborative governance system with diversified participants has taken shape. Public vocational schools act as the main providers while private vocational institutions supplement educational supply. Enterprises deeply engage in talent cultivation and invest in training facilities. Sustained and stable fiscal investment, a full-coverage student financial aid system, and a systematic mechanism for the cultivation and certification of dual-qualified teachers lay a solid resource guarantee foundation for high-quality development of vocational education. Thirdly, a differentiated layout system aligned with regional, industrial and diplomatic strategies has been established. Eastern regions prioritize majors related to high-tech industries; central regions focus on advanced manufacturing; western regions undertake industrial relocation via vocational education; northeastern regions concentrate on modern agriculture and the upgrading of traditional industries. The dynamic major adjustment mechanism rapidly responds to talent demands of national strategic emerging industries. Differentiated layout and cooperation plans for Luban Workshops are formulated for ASEAN, Central Asia and Africa, integrating vocational education thoroughly into the overall opening-up strategy.

The paper also points out that deep-seated constraints still hinder China’s vocational education from stepping into global leadership. First, deficiencies in systematic coordination: prominent gaps exist in vocational education development across regions; the benefit and risk-sharing mechanism for industry-education integration remains imperfect; the localized adaptability of international brands such as Luban Workshops needs to be further improved. Second, bottlenecks in connotation upgrading: the replicability of high-quality school-running experience from the Double High Plan is limited; digital construction mostly stays at instrumental levels such as resource storage and display; institutional obstacles block the implementation of supporting rules for credit mutual recognition and student mobility in vocational-general integration; staffing and salary barriers have not been fully eliminated to restrict two-way exchanges of dual-qualified teachers between schools and enterprises. Third, insufficient platform efficiency: the national smart education platform lags behind in developing intelligent analysis and personalized teaching service functions; achievements generated by the World Vocational College Skills Competition and the World Vocational and Technical Education Development Conference cannot be effectively transformed into daily teaching content and multilateral cooperation systems.

Faced with new trends in global vocational education reform, this paper proposes corresponding optimization paths as follows. First, improve cross-regional and cross-industry coordination mechanisms, build industry-education integration entities with shared benefits, launch targeted vocational education assistance programs for underdeveloped counties, and advance in-depth localized transformation of international cooperation models. Second, perfect the mechanism for radiating and popularizing experience from the Double High Plan, deepen project-based and digital curriculum teaching reform, break institutional barriers to vocational-general integration, and optimize supporting policies for two-way mobility of dual-qualified teachers between schools and enterprises. Third, upgrade the intelligent service capacity of smart education platforms, establish a normalized mechanism to translate competition and conference outcomes into teaching practices, and leverage international conferences to strengthen China’s capacity for agenda-setting and rule-making in global vocational education.

China’s vocational education marching toward the global center represents a long-term collaborative evolution of education, industry and institutions. Only by continuously deepening institutional innovation, digital transformation and participation in global governance can China remove persistent developmental bottlenecks and offer referable practical Chinese solutions for global skilled talent cultivation.

来源｜《职业·技术·教育》2026年第2期

作者｜宗诚（中国教科院职业教育质量评价研究中心执行主任）