Decision analysis identifies key drivers for cultivating craftsman spirit in vocational engineering students, highlighting school-enterprise partnerships and qualified faculty.
Against the background of manufacturing upgrading and the high-quality development of vocational education, the cultivation of craftsman spirit has become an important requirement for training skilled engineering personnel. This requirement is particularly relevant to precision manufacturing fields such as antenna assembly, electromagnetic material processing, microwave device fabrication, and functional component manufacturing, where process accuracy and operational responsibility directly affect product performance. To address problems such as ambiguous cultivation objectives, insufficient curriculum integration, and incomplete evaluation standards, this paper introduces fuzzy information theory and fuzzy analysis methods to construct a research framework covering problem identification, factor quantification, path construction, and effect evaluation. The Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) is used to quantify the weights of four influencing dimensions: schools, enterprises, students, and society. Combined with typical cases of craftsman spirit education in higher vocational colleges, five cultivation paths are proposed according to the FAHP weight ranking, including social support linkage based on fuzzy collaboration, practical teaching reform based on fuzzy decision-making, curriculum system reconstruction, teaching staff improvement, and cultural education integration. The results show that school-enterprise collaboration, with a weight of 0.28, and the competence of dual-qualified teachers, with a weight of 0.22, are the main driving factors. The proposed method provides a structured evaluation and implementation scheme for cultivating skilled personnel in engineering education, especially for manufacturing programs related to electromagnetic components, microwave devices, and precision functional structures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
H. Wang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: