Author(s)

YiJia Wang^1*, QianQian Zhao², YiMo Zhao³, JiQuan Wang³, NaiHui Wang³

Affiliation(s)

¹Department of Engineering Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, Heilongjiang, China.

²School of Water Conservancy and Civil Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, Heilongjiang, China.

³College of Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, Heilongjiang, China.

Corresponding Author

YiJia Wang

ABSTRACT

Against the backdrop of the ‘New Engineering + New Liberal Arts’ initiative, universities are placing increasing emphasis on cultivating interdisciplinary talents. In this context, the construction of a robust teaching quality evaluation system for interdisciplinary programs integrating management and engineering has become particularly crucial. This study analyzes the current challenges in the evaluation of such programs, including limited diversity of evaluation subjects and methods, incomplete indicator systems, and weak mechanisms for feedback and improvement. To address these issues, a framework for a multi-dimensional, improvement-oriented evaluation system with broad stakeholder participation is proposed. The framework emphasizes the involvement of multiple stakeholders, the development of a comprehensive indicator system that reflects the characteristics of management–engineering integration, and the enhancement of scientific rigor and inclusiveness in evaluation. Moreover, the study focuses on optimizing the operational mechanism by standardizing procedures and strengthening data management. By establishing a systematic feedback loop and a process of continuous improvement, the framework enables closed-loop management of teaching quality and dynamic optimization of program development. This research provides a theoretical foundation and practical reference for building a scientific, reasonable, and highly operable teaching quality evaluation system.

KEYWORDS

New Engineering; New Liberal Arts; Management–engineering Interdisciplinary programs; Teaching quality; Evaluation system

CITE THIS PAPER

YiJia Wang, QianQian Zhao, YiMo Zhao, JiQuan Wang, NaiHui Wang. Multi-dimensional evaluation framework for teaching quality in management-engineering interdisciplinary programs under the 'Double New' initiative. World Journal of Educational Studies. 2025, 3(3): 8-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/wjes3050.

REFERENCES

[1] The Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China. Opinions of the Ministry of Education on Deepening Undergraduate Education and Teaching Reform and Comprehensively Improving the Quality of Talent Cultivation. Sep. 29, 2019. https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2020/content_5469721.htm.

[2] Xu L. Innovative interdisciplinary models in engineering education: Transforming practices across global universities. Engineering Education Review, 2024, 2(3): 129-144.

[3] Zhao T, Zhu J, Jian Z, et al. Developing an Effective System for Engineering Management Education: ATeaching Practice and Evaluation Perspective. Education Sciences, 2024, 14(12): 1412.

[4] Guo Yirong, Song Yifan. How different types of resources affect teaching input: A multilevel empirical analysis based on a national survey of undergraduate university teachers. China Higher Education Research,2024, (12): 85-92.

[5] Andrews S, Keating J, Corbo J, et al. Transforming teaching evaluation in disciplines: A model and casestudy of departmental change. Transforming institutions: Accelerating systemic change in higher educationPressbooks Retrieved May, 2020, 27: 2022.

[6] The Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China. The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council issued the Overall Plan for Deepening the Reform of Educational Evaluation in the New Era. Oct. 13, 2020. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2020-10/13/content_5551032.htm.

[7] Pacher C, Woschank M, Zunk B M, et al. Engineering education 5.0: a systematic literature review on competence-based education in the industrial engineering and management discipline. Production & Manufacturing Research, 2024, 12(1): 2337224.

[8] Cong Yuhao. Reflections on achieving high-quality development of the new round of undergraduate teaching review and evaluation under the background of education evaluation reform, 2023, 12(05): 1-5.

[9] Xiong Bingqi. Why student evaluation of teaching does not work. Jan. 19, 2016. https://zqb.cyol.com/html/2016-01/19/nw.D110000zgqnb_20160119_3-02.htm.

[10] Repko A F, Szostak R. Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Sage publications, 2020.

[11] The Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China. Director of the Education Supervision Bureau of the Ministry of Education answers reporters’ questions on the Implementation Plan for the Undergraduate Teaching Review and Evaluation of Regular Higher Education Institutions. Feb. 7, 2021. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2021-02/07/content_5585686.htm?utm_source=chatgpt.com.

[12] University of Jinan. Essential Guide to the Undergraduate Education and Teaching Review and Evaluation of Regular Higher Education Institutions (2021–2025), Part IV. Apr. 3, 2024. https://jndxb.ujn.edu.cn/index/article/articleinfo.html?doc_id=3370636.

[13] Zhang Haojun. On the reform of college course assessment methods based on formative evaluation, 2018,(07): 180-182+192.

[14] Hou A Y C, Hill C, Justiniano D, et al. Is employer engagement effective in external quality assurance of higher education? A paradigm shift or QA disruption from quality assurance perspectives in Asia. Higher education, 2022: 1-20.

[15] Zhang Quanhong. How to transform the teacher evaluation system from single to multiple perspectives, 2009, (23): 7.

[16] Gao X, LI P, Shen J, et al. Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 2020, 7: 1-14.

[17] Hazelkorn E, Liu L. Developing meaningful higher education evaluation systems: Putting China in context.International Journal of Chinese Education, 2018, 7(2): 207-228.

[18] Egetenmeier A, Strickroth S. Scalable Two-Minute Feedback: Digital, Lecture-Accompanying Survey as a Continuous Feedback Instrument. arXiv preprint arXiv:231019334, 2023.