Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In response to the practical problems in the traditional teaching of industrial design majors, such as the fragmentation of the knowledge chain, the disconnection between theory and practice, and the gap between course teaching and industrial needs, this paper carries out a curriculum group teaching reform targeting four core courses: Product Design Materials and Technology, Product Structure Design, Mechanical Design Fundamentals, and Electrical and Electronic Technology. Relying on a school-enterprise and inter-school collaborative education model, engineering-oriented teaching projects are integrated, and a three-in-one teaching mode of "knowledge chain connection–dual-line classroom collaboration–physical verification closed loop" is constructed. The results of the reform practice show that this mode can break down the interdisciplinary knowledge barriers among material, structure, mechanism, and electronics, effectively make up for students' shortcomings in engineering physical implementation capability, and provide a low-cost, replicable practical approach for local provincial engineering universities to carry out interdisciplinary curriculum construction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: