Developing Curriculum Quality Evaluation Standards for Preschool Education Programmes in China's Digital Era: Evidence from Guizhou Province
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65514/ap3pzr05Keywords:
preschool education; higher vocational education; curriculum quality standards; educational digitalisation; Guizhou ProvinceAbstract
In the digital era, educational digitalisation has raised expectations for quality assurance and evidence-based improvement. Against this backdrop, preschool education programmes in China’s higher vocational colleges require a fit-for-purpose set of curriculum quality evaluation standards. Taking Guizhou Province as a case, this research develops and validates a standards-based evaluation framework to enhance programme quality and better meet societal demand for competent early-childhood teachers. An exploratory sequential mixed-methods design was adopted, comprising four stages: policy and literature analysis together with multi-stakeholder focus-group interviews to generate an initial indicator pool; two rounds of expert consultation using the Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) to reach consensus on indicator importance; Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) to derive indicator weights; and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation (FCE) to pilot the standards in two higher vocational institutions in Guizhou. The resulting framework contains five first-level domains, thirteen second-level indicators, and thirty-nine third-level indicators, covering training outcomes, faculty and resources, research, social service and reputation, and quality assurance. The pilot evaluation yielded a substantially higher composite score for Institution A (0.6647) than Institution B (0.4916), consistent with their observed differences in programme capacity and standing, indicating good discriminant validity and practical utility. The framework offers a systematic reference for standards-based evaluation of preschool education programmes in China and provides methodological guidance for quality improvement in vocational education.
References
1.Ahmadian Chashemi, M., Niazazari, K., & Salehi, M. (2021). Designing the model of Fourth-generation University to improve education and research quality in higher education. Educational Development, 12(3), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.22118/EDC.2020.241717.1477
2.Barnett, W. S. (2011). Effectiveness of early educational intervention. Science, 333(6045), 975–978. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204534
3.Başaran, M., Dursun, B., Gur Dortok, H. D., & Yılmaz, G. (2021). Evaluation of Preschool Education Program According to CIPP Model. Pedagogical Research, 6(1), em0087. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/9701
4.Davis, M. H., & Harden, R. M. (1999). Outcome-based education: Part 1—An introduction to outcome-based education. Medical Teacher, 21(1), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421599979969
5.Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis: Quality, productivity, and competitive position. Cam-bridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992
7.General Office of the CPC Central Committee & General Office of the State Council. (2021). Opinions on promoting the high-quality development of modern vocational education [Orig-inal in Chinese]. People’s Education. Retrieved from http://edu.people.com.cn/n1/2021/1013/c1006-32251694.html
8.Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
9.Harms, T., Clifford, R. M., & Cryer, D. (1998). Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale–Revised Edition (ECERS-R). New York: Teachers College Press.
10.Heckman, J. J., Moon, S. H., Pinto, R., Savelyev, P. A., & Yavitz, A. Q. (2010). The rate of return to the HighScope Perry Preschool Program. Journal of Public Economics, 94(1–2), 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.11.001
11.Mou, Y. X., & Ding, M. L. (2020). System construction for monitoring and improving the quality of talent training in preschool education. Journal of Tianjin Normal University (Basic Education Edition), (02), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.16826/j.cnki.1009-7228.2020.02.019 [In Chinese]
12.National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2009). Developmen-tally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (Position statement). Washington, DC: NAEYC.
13.OECD. (2019). Education at a Glance 2019: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.
14.Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) manual, Pre-K. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
15.Sylva, K., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B., Sammons, P., Melhuish, E., Elliot, K., & Totsika, V. (2006). Capturing quality in early childhood through environmental rating scales. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21(1), 76–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2006.01.003
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Educational Evaluation & Standards
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
