Fifthly, the motivation and ability of the teachers to invest in innovative education are not enough.
On the one hand, the teacher’s performance evaluation system is unbalanced, and the phenomenon of heavy research and light teaching persists for a long time, which seriously affects the enthusiasm of investing in innovative education. The evaluation and assessment of teachers’ ability to educate and practice are not strong, and the influence of teaching on the promotion of teachers’ professional and technical positions is limited. Some colleges and universities even separate scientific research from teaching, and they are “say turkey to one and bazzard to another” on scientific research performance and teaching quality. At the same time, the assessment of teachers’ teaching quality is mostly too simple, and insufficient attention is paid to factors such as teaching method innovation,square steel tubing student feedback and quality of training. In fact, there is nothing wrong with the scientific research itself. The key is not to “light teaching.” On the other hand, the high-quality and diversified teachers who are adapted to the demands of innovative education are underdeveloped, and the selection and training mechanism is not perfect. For example, the main challenge in promoting innovation and entrepreneurship education reform is the lack of professional entrepreneurial teachers or lecturers lacking practical experience, and the number of high-quality entrepreneurial tutors is very limited. At the same time, the selection and training mechanism of the existing teaching staff is not perfect, which affects the source quality of high-level teachers.tin plate suppliers
Sixthly, the scientific education quality evaluation guidance and evaluation system that is not scientifically needs to be adjusted and optimized.
As a “baton”, if the quality evaluation system is unreasonable, it will directly affect the transformation of education methods and distortion of training methods. In the existing relevant quality evaluation system, the evaluation focus relatively emphasizes discipline construction and scientific research achievements, and does not put the level and quality of talent cultivation at the forefront–this needs to be highly concerned by relevant departments. There are three reasons: Firstly, most of the assessment discipline construction and scientific research achievements are hard indicators and comparability, while the indicators for assessing talent training are soft and the indicators are fragmented,Steel Pipe Suppliers which is difficult to effectively reflect the actual results. Secondly, there are many quantitative indicators and few qualitative indicators – but the level of innovative talent training itself is difficult to measure with quantitative indicators. Thirdly, the main responsibility, quality awareness and quality culture of colleges and universities need to be strengthened. As the evaluation results will affect the resources of running schools and the quality of students, it is also easy to cause low-level competition among universities, even “only label, competition for labels”, which promotes the short-sighted tendency of quality improvement in some universities, which is not conducive to guiding different types of universities in innovation. Reasonable positioning and characteristics of the cultivation of talents. Policy solidification not only increases the identity difference between different universities, but also reduces the efficiency of resource allocation in the entire higher education field.