Construction and Practice of the Practical Education System for Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering in the Context of Emerging Engineering Education

Abstract

Under the background of “Emerging Engineering Education”, promoting reform in the practical teaching of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering is a crucial task for cultivating water conservancy professionals with sustainability competencies in the new era. This study addresses current issues in the practical education of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering, including fragmented practical content, disjointed tiered training, superficial teaching models, and simplified assessment methods. Guided by the Outcome-Based Education (OBE) concept and incorporating sustainability education principles, and integrating the distinctive features and course orientation of the university’s programme, this study implements a multidimensional practical teaching reform characterized by “three level–four integration–five dimension–three objective” framework in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering. This reform has achieved significant outcomes: teaching quality has been notably enhanced, with students demonstrating substantially improved practical and innovative capabilities, earning over ten national and provincial competition awards in the past two years. Faculty teaching research capabilities have strengthened, resulting in multiple provincial-level teaching reform projects and top-tier course approvals. The proportion of courses achieving a satisfactory level of target attainment stands at 66.7% of the total practical courses. Graduate and employer satisfaction rates reached 96.2% and 100%, respectively. The results demonstrate the strong applicability and effectiveness of this multidimensional practical teaching model in fostering talent equipped for sustainable water conservancy development, providing an important reference for practical teaching reforms in agricultural universities during the new era.

1. Introduction

“Emerging Engineering Education (EEE)”—a new mindset and approach for the future development of engineering education in China [1,2]—represents a major strategic choice for the reform of engineering education in the context of the new technological revolution and industrial transformation, ultimately aiming to cultivate innovative talent capable of addressing complex socio-environmental challenges outlined in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). One of the key tasks in advancing the cornerstone of Emerging Engineering Education development is enhancing ‘engineering practice, innovation, and entrepreneurship’ [3], with the ultimate aim of cultivating innovative talent for the new era [4]. Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering is a long-established discipline within traditional engineering, yet its mission is profoundly aligned with critical sustainability agendas such as water security (SDG 6) and food security (SDG 2). Practical teaching constitutes a vital component of the programme’s training framework. Thus, reforming professional practice in accordance with the “Emerging Engineering Education” initiative, in order to cultivate personnel capable of meeting new-era water conservancy demands, has become a crucial task in the current practical teaching reform within Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering.

Given the importance of innovative teaching methods in enhancing educational sustainability [5], scholars have undertaken a series of reform initiatives focused on practical courses across various disciplines. In the domain of production practice teaching, civil engineering programs have emphasized establishing long-term training bases through university-industry collaboration [6]. Concurrently, biotechnology programs have developed a dual evaluation model oriented toward practical application [7], while engineering practice courses have implemented project-driven instruction based on the U+ Engineering Education Cloud (U+ EEC) model [8]. Regarding course design, the Materials Forming and Control Engineering course has incorporated virtual internships and case-based teaching [9]. The C Programming course has integrated the Outcome-Based Education (OBE) philosophy [10], and Mechanical Manufacturing Equipment Design courses have fused engineering awareness training into their curriculum [11]. Furthermore, ideological and political education has been innovatively embedded within higher education Art and Design programs [12]. For specialized courses, virtual simulation technology is extensively employed in Microbial Engineering [13] and Cybersecurity Technology courses [14]. The Synthetic Biology course introduces typical case studies [15], and Project-Based Learning (PBL) is actively utilized in disciplines such as Geotechnical Engineering [16], Civil Engineering [17], Chemical Engineering, and Electrical Engineering [18]. Relevant studies have confirmed the feasibility and significant benefits of applying PBL methodologies in engineering curricula [19,20]. In terms of experimental teaching reform, initiatives include pedagogical restructuring and model refinement for both Programming [21] and Crop Breeding Trials courses [22], advancing Cell Biology experiments via an ‘Internet Plus Education’ platform [23], and developing research project-driven Chemical Engineering Integrated Experiments [24]. Many of these diverse reforms, either explicitly or implicitly, contribute to various aspects of sustainable development.

Existing research predominantly focuses on isolated teaching segments within specific disciplines: whether production placements in civil engineering or biotechnology [6,7], curriculum reforms for engineering practicals or C programming [8,10], virtual experiments in microbiology or cybersecurity courses [13,14], or PBL applications in geotechnical or electrical engineering [16,18]. While these studies provide valuable insights into optimizing specific courses or methods, they collectively highlight a common pattern of localized innovation. However, these reform measures have failed to adopt a holistic perspective at the program level, integrating various practical components—such as experiments, internships, and course design—into a unified ecosystem. This fragmentation stands in direct contrast to the holistic, program-level integration that is necessary for cultivating complex sustainability competencies. This fragmented approach fundamentally conflicts with the systematic integration required to cultivate students’ complex sustainability competencies. As a direct consequence, while such reforms may optimize specific teaching “nodes” locally, they struggle to address the “disconnections” and “redundancies” within the professional-level chain of practical skill development. This further results in the inability to construct a coherent and progressive pathway for fostering core competencies like systems thinking and social responsibility, ultimately limiting the overall effectiveness of systematically cultivating versatile and innovative talent. It is worth noting that the above ‘single-point’ reform paradigm also dominates practice-based teaching research in the field of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering, and research aimed at systematically and comprehensively reconstructing it is still relatively weak [25]. In contrast to this prevailing approach, the present study positions itself as an attempt at such a systematic reconstruction.

Therefore, the objective of this study is to propose an innovative practical teaching system characterized by three-tiered training objectives, four-integration teaching modes, five-dimensional evaluation, and three-outcome benchmarks. This system aims to establish a coherent framework for practical teaching through a progressive, multi-faceted approach that integrates diverse elements, employs multi-dimensional assessment, and maintains a clear objectives-driven focus. By achieving synergistic enhancement of resources and capabilities, it fundamentally overcomes the fragmented drawbacks of existing isolated reforms, thereby offering a comprehensive and replicable solution for systematically cultivating high-quality, sustainability-oriented professional talent.

2. Problem: Core Challenges in the Current Practical Education System

After years of development, our institution’s practical education programme in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering has achieved certain successes in terms of training models and educational quality. However, under the new requirements of the current era, the following issues remain:

2.1. Professional Practice Education Is Fragmented, Lacking a Systematic Top-Level Design

At present, the fragmentation of practical training within the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering programme is a prominent issue [5]. Practical courses such as “Curriculum Design of Pump and Water Pump Station”, “Curriculum Design of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering”, and “Curriculum Design of New Water Saving Irrigation Technology” are offered as standalone modules. These courses span different semesters, with little logical connection between their respective practical modules. Consequently, they fail to reflect the programme’s distinctive focus on the “integrated utilisation of water and soil resources” within Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering. The fragmentation between courses hinders students from developing a systematic professional understanding, resulting in practical skills training being characterized by “isolated points” rather than a “coherent developmental chain.” The cultivation of students through practical training in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering extends beyond the development of professional competencies. Elements such as ideological and political education, innovation and entrepreneurship training are often integrated into certain practical courses in a fragmented manner. This approach fails to establish a hierarchical and systematic framework linking these components with the entirety of practical curricula. Consequently, professional practice becomes disconnected from innovation-oriented thinking exercises and value-based guidance, exacerbating the fragmentation inherent in practical teaching. In summary, the fragmentation of professional practice-based education manifests across multiple dimensions. The integrity and interconnectedness of the practical content framework require further systematic planning to foster greater coherence across all teaching components—curriculum design, instructional methods, assessment, and evaluation—thereby generating synergistic effects through concerted efforts.

2.2. Disjointed Practical Teaching Levels, Lacking Innovative Progressive Design

Practical teaching courses should adhere to the educational principle of progressing from the simple to the complex and from the basic to the advanced. It is of paramount importance that the design of practical courses emphasises a tiered structure. The existing practical courses continue to be implemented in two distinct phases: ‘Engineering Awareness’ and ‘Engineering Practice’ [6]. This approach lacks progression towards an integrated innovation level, rendering it inadequate to support the cultivation of multidisciplinary talent required under the new engineering education paradigm. Engineering awareness activities often remain confined to superficial engagements such as equipment tours and demonstration experiments. Practical engineering sessions predominantly involve repetitive, outdated experiments and coursework projects, lacking integration with real-world engineering projects and, more critically, failing to cultivate innovative design and application capabilities. For instance, while students may have conducted measurements such as pump performance curves and channel flow rates in foundational cognitive experiments, they often lack the ability to apply this knowledge flexibly when designing pumping stations or irrigation districts in engineering practice. This deficiency extends further to innovative practical applications, such as optimising intelligent pump scheduling schemes or developing smart irrigation district infrastructure. Teaching content should be strengthened to incorporate comprehensive, innovative practical training that aligns with the characteristics of new engineering disciplines, integrating cutting-edge technologies like smart irrigation and digital twins. Practical teaching at all levels should enhance collaborative linkage to form a progressive innovation cultivation chain.

2.3. Practical Teaching Formats Remain Superficial, Lacking in Depth and Collaborative Innovation

Most practical teaching courses, such as “Hydraulic Engineering Surveying” and “Hydraulic Engineering Construction”, are conducted in the form of passive observation, comprehensive demonstrations, or site visits. There is a notable absence of widespread virtual simulation training using digital twins and 3D modeling, a shortage of immersive blended virtual-physical training, and insufficient cultivation of independent exploration and innovation. This ultimately results in a significant gap in the practical application of professional knowledge, as well as a serious misalignment between the practical curriculum and the industry’s demands for digital transformation. Teachers’ research achievements in agricultural and water resources fields are seldom transformed into practical teaching cases; there is a disconnect between real-world enterprise projects and practical training components; and advanced equipment in research laboratories remains inaccessible to undergraduate students. As a result, practical teaching remains confined to low-level repetition of traditional course design reports, failing to establish a virtuous cycle where “research informs teaching and teaching inspires research.” The integration of ideological and political education within practical Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering courses remains weak and lacks systematic design. Ideological and political education within various practical training components operates in isolation, exhibiting a lack of unity and coordination [9]. Only by transforming the current superficial nature of practical teaching, establishing diversified teaching models, and forming a new, multi-dimensional practical education system can we cultivate versatile talents who not only master modern water conservancy technologies but also possess an innovative spirit and a deep commitment to agriculture, rural areas, and farmers.

2.4. Practical Teaching Evaluation Remains Overly Simplistic, Lacking a Multi-Faceted Assessment Mechanism

Traditional practical assessment systems and models are singular in nature, relying solely on students’ mechanically completed course design reports, laboratory reports, and internship logbooks as final grades. The evaluation outcomes lack process-based assessment, with assessment criteria being singular. Taking the “Cognition Practice of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering” as an example, the assessment criteria remain structured around the internship manual (60%), internship performance (10%), and internship outcome presentation (30%). This evaluation model, which prioritises outcomes over process, leads students to pursue perfection in report format at the expense of substantive enhancement in practical skills. Yet, paradoxically, no input or rating from the companies where students intern is factored into the final grade. As a result, the market applicability of the students’ practical achievements cannot be effectively verified. Furthermore, the evaluation indicators for comprehensive practical courses primarily rely on a single-objective attainment analysis, and there is a lack of diversified and systematic development of these criteria. This fragmented, singular, and non-standardised system of summative assessment and evaluation renders its outcomes difficult to utilise for feedback, hinders the continuous improvement of course objectives, content, and implementation, and is detrimental to enhancing students’ comprehensive qualities. It requires further refinement.

3. Method: Construction of the Professional Practice Education System

This study adopts the design-based research paradigm. Its complete research path is as follows: (1) diagnosing challenges in practical education (Section 2), (2) designing the solution framework (Section 3), (3) empirically evaluating its teaching effectiveness (Section 4), (4) analyzing the comprehensive outcomes (Section 5), (5) examining its outreach and collaborative application (Section 6), and finally (6) drawing conclusions and reflections (Section 7). This path constitutes a complete cycle from problem diagnosis to design, validation, analysis, and dissemination, thereby providing a clear methodological basis for this study. To address the challenges outlined above (Section 2) and in alignment with the requirements of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) and New Engineering Education, this section designs and constructs an integrated “three-level, four-integration, five-dimension, three-evaluation” practical teaching system framework to systematically reshape professional practical education. The four core components of this framework are elaborated in detail in the following subsections (Section 3.1, Section 3.2, Section 3.3 and Section 3.4).

3.1. A Three-Tiered Progressive Knowledge Structure System

The programme centres on cultivating students’ foundational subject knowledge, professional competencies, integrated application skills, and comprehensive innovation capabilities with a strong orientation towards sustainable development. It emphasises the development of fundamental qualities and values, core professional skills, engineering practice abilities, and innovative capacities. Based on the OBE concept and the requirements of the ‘New Engineering’ construction, the process training and practical teaching are strengthened in stages and at different levels, focusing on cultivating students’ ability to solve complex engineering problems with sustainability dimensions. From the first year to the fourth year, theoretical teaching is combined with practical teaching, practical teaching is integrated with engineering practice and scientific research, and practical teaching is combined with academic competitions. Adhering to the scientific principles of ‘progression from basic to advanced, from elementary to sophisticated, in a step-by-step manner’ and ‘practice, cognition, further practice, and renewed cognition’, a three-tiered practical teaching system for agricultural water conservancy specialisations has been established, comprising ‘Disciplinary Cognition Layer’, ‘Engineering Practice Layer’, and ‘Comprehensive Innovation Layer’.

3.1.1. Disciplinary Cognition Layer

This tier, implemented primarily in the first and second academic years, focuses on foundational learning at the cognitive level. Through teaching methods such as lectures, field visits and demonstrations, it aims to establish students’ initial understanding of engineering concepts and stimulate their interest in participating in engineering practice. By teaching regulations and the history of agricultural water conservancy, it cultivates students’ professional discipline in adhering to rules, fosters national pride, and instils a sense of mission to contribute to rural revitalisation.

3.1.2. Engineering Practice Layer

Building upon the cognitive foundation, this tier, typically delivered in the second and third years, focuses on foundational engineering training with a hands-on approach, combining classroom instruction with practical exercises. It employs a blended teaching methodology integrating physical teaching resources with virtual simulation platforms to enhance students’ comprehension of practical content. This cultivates their ability to apply knowledge comprehensively and execute tasks effectively, fostering sound engineering literacy with an emphasis on resource efficiency, environmental impact awareness, and safety while honing a spirit of excellence akin to that of master craftsmen. Training projects increasingly incorporate scenarios such as water-saving irrigation, pollution prevention in water conservancy projects, and resilient infrastructure design, directly linking skill development to SDG 6, 12 (Responsible Consumption), and 13 (Climate Action).

3.1.3. Comprehensive Innovation Layer

As the capstone experience of the program, this tier, concentrated in the third and fourth year, establishes a comprehensive innovation training programme designed to achieve the objectives of integrated practical training within the curriculum, research project-based integrated training, and competition project-based integrated training. Employing a problem-based, case-driven teaching approach, students are trained to integrate fundamental professional knowledge for engineering design through interdisciplinary, comprehensive in-class integrated projects. Guided by the principle of integrating education with research, practical projects are developed from faculty research initiatives to hone students’ comprehensive engineering capabilities. Relying on platforms such as the China International “Internet Plus” College Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Competition, the National College Student Innovation and Design Competition on Hydraulic Engineering, and the National College Student Innovation Competition on Numerical Modeling in Water Sciences, open and comprehensive innovation practices are carried out based on the principles of cross-grade integration, multi-disciplinary collaboration, and interdisciplinary approaches. Through full participation in the process of “proposal submission–implementation–conclusion,” students’ teamwork, comprehensive innovative thinking, and innovation skills are cultivated. This multi-year, interdisciplinary approach engages students in the entire project lifecycle—from proposal submission to implementation and completion—effectively cultivating their teamwork capabilities, comprehensive innovative thinking, and practical skills. The themes of these competitions and projects are deliberately aligned with national and global sustainability agendas, requiring students to propose solutions that are not only technologically sound but also economically viable, socially equitable, and environmentally benign.

The specific course composition and corresponding competency development objectives for each tier are systematically summarized in

Table 1. Three-Tiered Progressive Knowledge Structure System.

Layer (Stage & Duration)	Courses	Knowledge and Ability Requirements
Major Cognition Layer (Year 1–2)	Cognition Practice of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering Teaching Practice of Hydraulic Engineering Geology Cognition Practice of Engineering Hydrology	Cultivate social responsibility, team awareness, and rule awareness; stimulate interest and enthusiasm in the profession and engineering.
Engineering Practice Layer (Year 2–3)	Teaching Practice of Hydraulic Engineering Survey Curriculum Design of Hydraulic Reinforced Concrete Structure Curriculum Design of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering Curriculum Design of New Water Saving Irrigation Technology Curriculum Design of Pump and Water Pump Station Curriculum Design of Hydraulic Structure Curriculum Design of Hydraulic Engineering Construction	Enhance students’ comprehension of practical content; cultivate the ability to apply knowledge comprehensively and execute tasks effectively; foster sound engineering literacy and a spirit of excellence akin to that of master craftsmen.
Comprehensive Innovation Layer (Year 3–4)	Graduation Design (Thesis) for Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering, Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering Professional Production and Graduation Practice, China International “Internet Plus” College Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Competition, National College Student Innovation and Design Competition on Hydraulic Engineering, National College Student Innovation Competition on Numerical Modeling in Water Sciences	Develop comprehensive innovative thinking; cultivate the ability to comprehensively apply professional knowledge in practice and innovative skills.

.

3.2. The Four Integration Practical Teaching System

Featuring four modules—Virtual-Real Integration, Research-Education Integration, University-Industry Integration, and Curriculum Ideology and Politics Integration—a diversified practical teaching system is established, aimed at cultivating students’ ability to address complex engineering problems.

3.2.1. Virtual-Real Integration Teaching Module

By adopting a hybrid development strategy integrating robust hardware with advanced software, we have established a Virtual-Real Integrated Teaching Platform (partial configuration shown in Figure 1). This platform strategically consolidates and upgrades existing resources, and introduces new digital tools, to diversify learning methodologies and enhance hands-on experiences across the three-tiered curriculum. A complete inventory of the hardware (e.g., surveying drones, specialized fluid mechanics apparatus) and software (e.g., virtual simulation platforms, digital twin modeling tools) employed is provided as Supplementary Material (Table S1). The aforementioned hardware and software resources are strategically allocated according to the distinct training objectives of the three-tiered teaching system, ensuring deep integration between technology and pedagogy. In the Disciplinary Cognition Layer, basic demonstration apparatus (e.g., Bernoulli equation and Reynolds experiment setups) and fluid mechanics virtual simulation platforms are primarily used for in-class demonstrations and guided exploration. In the Engineering Practice Layer, surveying drones, total stations, ArcGIS Pro (version 3.0), and hydraulic construction simulation systems form the core tools of project-based teaching modules. In the Comprehensive Innovation Layer, advanced resources such as multi-source flow field measurement systems and watershed digital twin modeling software mainly support open-ended research projects and academic competitions. Collectively, the strategic integration of these virtual simulation and digital modeling tools plays a pivotal role in our practice-oriented curriculum. This integration enables safe, repeatable, and scalable experimentation with complex or high-risk engineering scenarios, bridges the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world application, and provides a foundational platform for developing critical innovation skills—addressing key limitations of relying solely on physical hardware and field exercises.

3.2.2. Research-Education Integration Teaching Module

Through introductory seminars and lectures by experts from both within and outside the university, students gain close exposure to cutting-edge research, broadening their horizons and cultivating their interests. A bridge is built between supervisors and undergraduates, implementing the ‘Three Early’ system for undergraduates (early entry into research teams, early access to laboratories, and early involvement in research projects). This guides students towards participating in frontier scientific research, thereby fostering their innovative capabilities. Leveraging faculty research projects, practical topics are developed to hone students’ comprehensive capabilities, thereby cultivating their integrated engineering practice skills. Taking the ‘Micro-irrigation System Design’ case in Figure 2 as an example, faculty members adapt drip irrigation techniques from research projects into teaching scenarios. Following classroom instruction on theoretical principles, students work in groups to optimise drip irrigation schemes for experimental fields. They employ the Smart Soil Moisture Meter developed by the research team to collect hydrological data, integrating this with classroom theory to refine their design proposals. In another case from Figure 2, the lecturer’s research project ‘Design of River Intake Structures’ was adapted into a teaching case study. Key theoretical principles for intake site selection were explained, followed by guided student experiments using a river channel model. Equipment such as flow meters was employed to measure relevant hydrological parameters, enabling students to verify discrepancies between measured data and theoretical analysis. This approach cultivates students’ ability to solve practical engineering problems. By incorporating these exemplary research outcomes into the teaching case repository, we achieve a deep integration of research and teaching. This approach stimulates students’ innovative thinking and practical capabilities, while cultivating their critical analysis and reflective skills.

3.2.3. University-Industry Integration Teaching Module

A core challenge is enabling students to master theoretical knowledge while simultaneously applying it to engineering practice. This is crucial to address the lag of certain practical components behind socio-economic development—such as modern smart water management and big data technologies—and the resulting mismatch with the evolving demands of the agricultural and water conservancy sector. It is necessary to strengthen school-enterprise cooperation, send students to enterprises for internships and practical training, learn and understand real-world engineering problems, as well as the research methods and approaches for addressing practical problems and challenges. Concurrently, students learn how enterprises effectively achieve the practical transformation and commercialisation of scientific and technological achievements and technologies, thereby enhancing their innovation and entrepreneurship capabilities and standards. To operationalize this approach, we have established an extensive collaborative network, the partners of which are visualized in Figure 3. Within this broad partnership ecosystem, we have undertaken several key initiatives. During the project’s implementation phase, the Department of Agricultural Water Engineering spearheaded a collaborative education framework agreement with the Research Service Centre of Shanxi Fenhe Irrigation Management Co., Ltd. in Taiyuan, China. This partnership established an undergraduate teaching internship base and jointly applied for the ‘Shanxi Wenshui Hulan High Water Efficiency Agricultural Science and Technology Courtyard’ initiative, supported by the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, and the China Association for Science and Technology. Furthermore, the Department of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering has established the ‘North China Water Conservancy Industry-Education Integration Community’ in partnership with Wanjiazhai Water Holdings Group Co., Ltd. (Taiyuan, China), Shanxi Water Conservancy Vocational and Technical College, and other institutions. It has subsequently entered into collaborative education agreements with multiple enterprises, including the Shanxi Provincial Hydrological and Water Resources Survey Station and Shanxi Water Affairs Koushang Reservoir Development and Construction Management Co., Ltd. (Jinzhong, China). By strengthening university-enterprise cooperation and advancing joint initiatives, the consortium fully leverages the advantages of collaborative talent cultivation.

3.2.4. Curriculum Ideology and Politics Integration Teaching Module

Student-centered and adhering to the fundamental mission of fostering virtue and nurturing talents, this approach combines the characteristics of practical courses in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering. It aims to fully explore the ideological and political elements within the curriculum and their integration pathways, thereby creating a diversified and multi-dimensional teaching system for curriculum ideology and politics. This fosters a synergistic educational effect between ideological and political education and professional course education. Through on-site instruction by professional teachers and experts from practical training bases, value guidance, knowledge impartation, and ability cultivation are integrated into the practical teaching process, ultimately cultivating new-era water conservancy talents with a strong sense of social responsibility. Specifically, the integration of ideological and political education into practical teaching activities at all levels encompasses the following three aspects: At the cognitive stage, which is primarily based on cognitive internships, the emphasis lies on cultivating students’ correct values towards life and reinforcing patriotic sentiments and national pride; In the engineering practice phase, which focuses on hands-on course design, students are guided to uphold professional ethics and the spirit of craftsmanship, strictly adhering to relevant regulations. They are also encouraged to engage in critical thinking and questioning to cultivate innovative thinking. At the comprehensive innovation level, leveraging activities such as graduation theses and various competitions, students hone their teamwork and spirit of dedication, cultivating a spirit characterized by bold innovation, daring breakthroughs, diligent exploration, and practical proficiency. The mapping of ideological-political elements to specific courses and activities across these three tiers is systematically illustrated in Figure 4. Through on-site instruction by professional teachers and experts from practical training bases, value guidance, knowledge impartation, and ability cultivation are integrated into the practical teaching process, ultimately cultivating new-era water conservancy talents with a strong sense of social responsibility.

3.3. Five-Dimensional Curriculum Assessment System

To address the issues of a singular and insufficiently comprehensive evaluation system for practical teaching in engineering training, a five-dimensional, all-encompassing and diversified comprehensive assessment framework has been established. This framework integrates process-based evaluation with outcome-based assessment, guided by the principles of: Diversifying the evaluation subjects; Diversifying the assessment formats; Implementing process-oriented assessment; Focusing assessment content on competency development. The first dimension: Ideological and Political Reflective Report (accounting for 10% of the overall mark). Based on the submitted specialized ideological and political reports, instructors can assess students’ comprehension of the educational essence of professional ideological and political training, and grade the reports according to their quality. The second dimension: Regular Attendance (10%), graded based on attendance records during the student’s professional practice. The third dimension: Practical Performance (20%), determined through a comprehensive assessment of students’ practical performance based on teacher evaluations, peer assessments, and feedback from industry mentors. The fourth dimension: Internship Report (40%), assessed comprehensively based on the final submitted report, evaluating aspects including writing approach, completeness of content, accuracy of expression, integration of text and visuals, and depth of analysis. The fifth dimension: Internship Presentation (20%): Students shall present their practical achievements through means such as PowerPoint presentations. Tutors shall assess and award marks based on the accuracy and completeness of content, as well as the fluency of presentation.

3.4. Three-Objective Practical Education Effectiveness Evaluation System

To objectively and comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of practical teaching, it is crucial to establish a scientifically sound and well-structured ‘three-objective’ integrated course assessment system combined with the characteristics of practical courses in the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering programme.

3.4.1. Learning Outcome Assessment

To effectively evaluate the attainment of graduation requirements, a multi-dimensional assessment of the graduation requirements for the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering programme shall be conducted. This will verify and determine whether the quality of professional talent cultivation meets the anticipated standards, and analyse the strengths and weaknesses of students’ various competencies. The assessment of graduation requirements fulfilment for the practical courses in the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering programme is conducted under the guidance of the Teaching Steering Committee of the School of Water Resources Science and Engineering. An evaluation panel comprising school leadership, department heads, and relevant teaching staff employs a combined methodology of course objective attainment analysis, scoring sheet analysis, and questionnaire surveys to evaluate students’ achievement of course objectives. The assessment cycle lasts for one academic year.

3.4.2. Graduate Feedback

To comprehensively and objectively understand the accomplishment of the programme’s practical course objectives, a graduate tracking feedback mechanism has been established. This enables timely monitoring of graduate employment quality and medium-to-long-term career development, whilst gauging graduates’ overall assessment of the programme’s talent cultivation and employment support services. Through questionnaires, individual interviews and focus group discussions with past graduates, we gathered their evaluations of current employment and job roles, and the impact of cultivating knowledge and abilities in various aspects of the profession on work, as well as their feedback and recommendations for the programme/faculty regarding: New changes in talent requirements from enterprises and institutions, New demands for professional development, New needs within the curriculum system, New objectives for es for cultivation of practical innovation ability.

3.4.3. Employer Feedback

To ascertain the current societal demand for graduates in this major, understand employers’ assessments of the quality of graduate training, gauge industry and corporate experts’ evaluations of the programme’s curriculum, and initiate efforts to align our institution’s talent development with societal requirements, we shall conduct employer feedback through individual interviews, group discussions, and questionnaire surveys. Specifically, through opportunities such as teachers undertaking official travel for meetings, leading professional placements and social practice activities, as well as employer recruitment drives for graduating students on campus, we proactively engage with employers to gain insights into the work performance of both current and past graduates. This enables a comprehensive understanding of industry and corporate requirements, the overall calibre of our graduates in terms of ideological integrity, professional knowledge, technical competence and work achievements, the attainment of our educational objectives, and the level of satisfaction and recognition expressed by employers towards our graduates.

4. Results: Evaluation of Practical Education Effectiveness

To comprehensively and objectively evaluate the overall effectiveness of practical teaching, the assessment in this study is built upon established and reliable methods of course evaluation [13,14,15,21]. The “three-objective” system we employ represents an integration and application of the multidimensional, structured assessment paradigm, aiming to systematically measure teaching effectiveness and student learning outcomes, thereby ensuring the reliability and validity of the current evaluation approach.

4.1. Results of Learning Outcome Assessment

This assessment is a comprehensive evaluation that targets all practical courses outlined in the training plan, which are distributed across the four-year undergraduate program, and is based on the complete academic performance data of 72 students across all these courses. Figure 5 shows the evaluation results of the learning outcome assessment for the practical courses in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering. As shown in Figure 5, the achievement levels of four practical courses—Teaching Practice of Hydraulic Engineering Geology, Curriculum Design of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering, Curriculum Design of New Water Saving Irrigation Technology, and Curriculum Design of Hydraulic Engineering Construction—ranged between 70% and 80%, indicating a moderate level. The achievement rates for the remaining practical courses all ranged between 80% and 90%, representing a satisfactory level. The course design objectives for Agricultural Water Management achieved the lowest attainment rate at merely 74.0%, while the graduation and industrial internship objectives attained the highest rate at 85.8%. This may suggest that students’ ability to integrate and apply knowledge—including sustainability principles—in complex, authentic settings is stronger than their performance in isolated, theoretical design tasks. The proportion of courses achieving a satisfactory level of target attainment stands at 66.7% of the total practical courses. This indicates that following the implementation of this project’s three-tiered, four-integration, five-dimensional, three-objective practical teaching reform, over half of the practical courses have achieved better teaching outcomes. Overall, the attainment data reflect not only the mastery of technical skills but also the progressive acquisition of competencies essential for sustainable development in the water sector.

4.2. Results of Graduate Feedback Analysis

A survey of graduates approximately five years post-graduation examined diverse employment scenarios, encompassing engineering and technical personnel in various design and construction firms, administrative staff within water conservancy management departments and Party-government organs at all levels, civil servants, self-employed individuals, and professionals in other sectors. Among graduates, 50 questionnaires were distributed, with 44 valid responses collected, resulting in a response rate of 87%. The survey demonstrated broad coverage, revealing that 38% of respondents were engaged in roles fully aligned with their academic specialisation, while 47% held positions partially aligned with their field of study. The detailed distribution of graduate satisfaction levels across the six educational objectives is presented in

Table 2. Graduate Feedback Results.

Educational Objective	Professional Competencies Cultivated by the Educational Objectives	Achievement Evaluation
		Very Dissatisfied	Somewhat Dissatisfied	Basically Satisfied	Relatively Satisfied	Very Satisfied
(1)	Possesses the ability to apply fundamental theories and specialised knowledge in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering to engineering practice and scientific research.	0	2	11	16	15
(2)	Possesses sound scientific and cultural literacy, upholds high professional ethics in engineering, and demonstrates a strong sense of social responsibility.	0	0	9	20	15
(3)	Possesses a certain degree of international perspective and innovative capability, demonstrating the ability to innovate or improve within their work, and effectively communicate with peers and the wider public.	0	5	11	14	14
(4)	Possesses the ability to correctly apply relevant technical standards, specifications, guidelines and procedures within the profession, and demonstrates independent working capability. Capable of independently completing the survey, planning, feasibility studies, design and construction reports for engineering projects of general complexity within the profession, passing review or acceptance, or having directly participated in the entire process of more complex engineering projects.	0	2	10	19	13
(5)	Possesses a degree of organisational coordination and management capability. Capable of serving as the technical lead for small-scale engineering projects within their specialism, able to organise and guide the work of junior technical personnel in their field, and capable of functioning effectively as a team member within large-scale engineering projects.	0	1	11	19	13
(6)	Be able to continually expand knowledge and enhance capabilities through continuing education or other lifelong learning pathways.	0	0	11	18	15

. The evaluation statuses for educational objectives (ii) and (vi) were the most favourable, with satisfaction with the Achievement Evaluation reaching 100%, driven by the absence of any “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied” ratings. In contrast, the status for educational objective (iii) was the least favourable, at only 88.6%. This indicates that the highest levels of achievement were attained in moral character and social responsibility, alongside lifelong learning capabilities, while also indicating that innovative and international competencies require further development. Overall, 96.2% of graduates expressed satisfaction with the Achievement Evaluation.

4.3. Results of Employer Feedback Analysis

For employers, 30 questionnaires were distributed, and 25 were returned, achieving a response rate of 83%. This employer survey encompassed various state-owned enterprises, including design institutes and construction firms (31%), government agencies (11%), private enterprises (28%), public institutions (25%), and higher education institutions (5%). These entities are distributed in various provinces and municipalities, including Beijing, Chongqing, Shanxi, Hebei, Shaanxi, Yunnan, and Qinghai. Each employer recognised the quality of talent development within this programme and was satisfied with the achievement of the training objectives in this major. The detailed distribution of employer satisfaction levels across the six educational objectives is presented in

Table 3. Employer Feedback Results.

Educational Objectives Serial Number	Professional Competencies for Cultivating Graduates	Achievement Evaluation
		Very Dissatisfied	Somewhat Dissatisfied	Basically Satisfied	Relatively Satisfied	Very Satisfied
(1)	Possesses the ability to apply fundamental theories and specialised knowledge in Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering to engineering practice and scientific research.	0	0	7	12	6
(2)	Possesses sound scientific and cultural literacy, upholds high professional ethics in engineering, and demonstrates a strong sense of social responsibility.	0	0	3	13	9
(3)	Possesses a certain degree of international perspective and innovative capability, demonstrating the ability to innovate or improve within their work, and effectively communicate with peers and the wider public.	0	0	7	11	7
(4)	Possesses the ability to correctly apply relevant technical standards, specifications, guidelines and procedures within the profession, and demonstrates independent working capability. Capable of independently completing the survey, planning, feasibility studies, design and construction reports for engineering projects of general complexity within the profession, passing review or acceptance, or having directly participated in the entire process of more complex engineering projects.	0	0	6	12	7
(5)	Possesses a degree of organisational coordination and management capability. Capable of serving as the technical lead for small-scale engineering projects within their specialism, able to organise and guide the work of junior technical personnel in their field, and able to function effectively as a team member within large-scale engineering projects.	0	0	6	12	7
(6)	Be able to continually expand knowledge and enhance capabilities through continuing education or other lifelong learning pathways.	0	0	6	10	9

. Employers consider the attainment of Educational Objective (II) to be the best, by a clear margin (88% satisfaction). The remaining five objectives achieved relatively close satisfaction rates, clustered between 72% and 76%, with Objective (III) being viewed as the least satisfactory among them. In other words, employers consider graduates in this major to demonstrate the strongest attainment in terms of moral character and social responsibility, with satisfactory attainment in lifelong learning capabilities, yet identify innovative and international competencies as requiring further development. All surveyed employers expressed satisfaction with the achievement evaluation, representing a satisfaction rate of 100%.

5. Outcomes: Comprehensive Enhancement of Teaching and Learning

5.1. Sustained Production of Pedagogical Research Outcomes with Further Enhanced Teaching Research Proficiency

Throughout the process of educational reform, teachers have been implicitly encouraged to continually acquire new knowledge, master fresh teaching techniques, and integrate Innovative thinking. This has significantly enhanced their overall competence in practical teaching, yielded sustained outcomes from teaching reforms, and progressively strengthened the research and teaching capabilities of the teaching staff. Over the past two years, the faculty of the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering Department has driven a series of achievements through teaching practice reforms, including the development of a virtual simulation platform for practical training, the publication of seven teaching reform papers, and the approval of five provincial-level educational reform projects. Furthermore, they have earned first, second, and third prizes in national teaching competitions in the fields of agricultural engineering and water conservancy. Additionally, a number of instructors were honored with the “Outstanding Advisor” award for guiding students to success in the “Huawi Cup” National College Students’ Innovation Design Competition for Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering and Related Majors, the Water Science Numerical Simulation Innovation Competition, and for supervising University-Level Top-Notch Undergraduate Theses. These accomplishments collectively demonstrate the continuous improvement of the faculty’s teaching capacity and the sustained enhancement of teaching and research expertise.

5.2. Students Have Yielded Substantial Innovative Practical Achievements, Demonstrating Enhanced Comprehensive Practical Innovation Capabilities

Through the ongoing implementation of the “Three Levels, Four Integration, Five Dimensions, and Three Objectives” multidimensional practical teaching model, undergraduate students in the Department of Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering have achieved significant results over the past two years. They have earned a total of 14 national and provincial awards in a range of competitions, including the National Hydraulic Innovation Design Competition for College Students, the National Energy Economics Academic Creativity Competition, the May Day Mathematical Contest in Modeling, the “Huawi Cup” National Innovation Design Competition for Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering and Related Majors, and the National GIS Skills Competition for College Students. In addition, students have obtained approval for three provincial-level College Student Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program projects. Participation in these innovation practice competitions and entrepreneurial initiatives has provided an excellent platform for self-expression and academic exchange. It has effectively bridged theoretical knowledge with practical application, strengthened students’ ability to solve real-world problems, stimulated innovative thinking and teamwork, and enhanced their overall employability.

5.3. Four Integration Multi-Modal Teaching Model: Driving Curriculum Quality and Efficiency

The teaching models of Virtual-Real Integration, Research-Education Integration, and University-Industry Integration have been fully established and continuously improved. Teaching methods are dynamically adjusted according to learning content, while the learning content itself is consistently optimized in response to societal needs. This diverse teaching model enriches the practical content of the curriculum, promotes its practical application and alignment with cutting-edge developments, and meets the practical learning needs of students across different practice categories and levels. Based on a multi-disciplinary integrated teaching model, this approach has stimulated students’ interest in identifying theoretical issues through practical application. It facilitates the return of practice to theory and the application of theory to practice, thereby grounding knowledge, promoting the generation of knowledge-based outcomes, enhancing students’ ability to comprehensively apply knowledge to analyse and resolve real-world problems, and stimulating their capacity for innovative practice. The establishment and refinement of an integrated teaching model for ideological and political education has enabled the simultaneous enhancement of moral character and professional competence. Through practical course activities, students gained tangible insight into the achievements of national agricultural and water conservancy technological innovation. This stimulated their enthusiasm for contributing to national water conservancy development, fostering a profound sense of national pride and civic duty. The initiative enhanced students’ sense of responsibility ignited their interest in proactive learning and innovative thinking, and strengthened their collaborative spirit and communication skills.

5.4. Multidimensional Curriculum Evaluation System Fostering Curriculum Innovation and Development

The diversified course assessment methodology and multi-objective integrated course evaluation system fully respect individual student differences, emphasise students’ experiential engagement in problem-exploration processes, highlight the importance of formative learning, effectively mitigate last-minute cramming before examinations, ensure constructive two-way interaction between teachers and students throughout the learning journey, and have yielded commendable pedagogical outcomes. The diversified course assessment system fully considers students’ level of engagement throughout the practical process, the quality level of the final report on the outcomes of the practice, and their presentation skills during the final defense. This approach ensures a more comprehensive and objective evaluation of students’ capabilities. Concurrently, the formative assessment methodology cultivates and hones students’ overall competencies and qualities. Teachers make timely adjustments to teaching content and methods based on the results of formative assessment, to enhance the relevance and effectiveness of instruction. Through the sustained implementation of a diversified formative assessment model, teaching staff gain timely insights into student learning feedback and assessment outcomes. This enables continuous refinement and optimisation of teaching content and methodologies, thereby driving ongoing course improvement and enhancement, securing approval and funding for provincial-level teaching reform initiatives and first-class course development projects. Through these reform outcomes, diverse process-based course assessment methods can better meet the demands of modern education and promote the comprehensive innovation and development of curricula.

6. Outreach: Dissemination and Collaborative Application

6.1. The Self-Built Virtual Simulation Experimental Platform Has Gained Widespread Application

The self-developed ‘Virtual Simulation Experiment on Infiltration Characteristics of Unsaturated Soils’ has been designated as a Shanxi Provincial First-Class Virtual Simulation Course. It is now available on the Experimental Space website, accessible to the wider public, thereby overcoming constraints of time and location for experimentation. The teaching effectiveness of the agricultural water management course experiments has been significantly enhanced. The virtual simulation software and experiments developed under this project have been implemented at institutions including Taiyuan University of Technology and Tianjin Agricultural University, receiving unanimous acclaim from users.

6.2. The Achievements in Course-Based Ideological and Political Education Have Been Publicised and Promoted

Members of the course teaching team were invited to attend the special online public lecture entitled ‘Mentor Forum’ hosted by Taiyuan University of Technology. In this event, taking the course “Water-saving Irrigation Theory and Technology” as a starting point, we explored in depth how to identify and integrate ideological and political elements, sharing our practical experience in developing ideological and political education within the curriculum. By combining online and offline activities, the initiative attracted over 2000 participants, generating significant publicity and positive feedback within the education sector. This provides valuable references for promoting the integration of water-saving irrigation technologies with ideological and political education.

6.3. Engage in Broad-Based Collaboration with Sister Universities

Faculty members attended a series of teaching and research exchange events, including the 2023 Academic Seminar on Professional Certification of Hydraulic Engineering Education, the 7th Council Annual Meeting of the Higher Education Branch of China Water Education Association, the 2nd National Forum of Deans and Party Secretaries from Water Conservancy Colleges in Agricultural Universities, the Training Workshop on the Newly Compiled Core Textbook “Agricultural Water Conservancy” under the Ministry of Education’s Agricultural Engineering “101 Plan”, the 15th National Conference on Discipline Construction and Teaching Reform in Agricultural Engineering and Related Fields, and the 2023 National Seminar on “Agricultural Power and Talent Cultivation in Agricultural Engineering” for Higher Education Institutions. Leveraging these opportunities, they conducted extensive exchanges on achievements and experiences with peer institutions and received highly positive feedback.

7. Conclusions

The systematic reform of the practical education framework within the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering discipline is pivotal to enhancing teaching quality and advancing the transformation of talent cultivation models. This research primarily serves three key stakeholders: educators and administrators, the industry and societal sectors, and the students themselves. More fundamentally, it represents a strategic initiative to embed the principles of education for sustainable development into the core of engineering training. The study proposed an integrated practical teaching framework characterized by its ‘three-tiered, four-integration, five-dimensional, three-objective’ structure. Specifically, it constructed a three-tiered knowledge structure encompassing major cognition, engineering practice, and comprehensive innovation; established a four-integration practical teaching system featuring virtual-physical convergence, science-education convergence, university-enterprise convergence, and ideological-political convergence; proposed a five-dimensional course assessment system based on ideological and political reflective report, regular attendance and participation, practical performance evaluation, practical work report, and practical work presentation; and clarified a three-objective practical education effectiveness evaluation system comprising learning outcome assessment, graduate feedback, and employer feedback. Through the continuous advancement of practical curriculum reform, significant achievements have been attained across multiple dimensions: enhancing teaching and research capabilities among faculty, particularly in sustainability-related fields; fundamentally stimulating students’ enthusiasm for practical innovation and cultivating their problem-solving competencies within sustainability contexts; strengthening the effectiveness of ideological and political education by linking professional ethics directly to social and environmental responsibility; and improving societal recognition. This work generates impact across three levels: practically by reforming our institution’s teaching system; disciplinarily by providing a replicable model for related engineering fields; and strategically by contributing to national sustainability goals through talent cultivation aligned with SDGs. The framework provides a replicable solution for systemic practical teaching reform in related STEM fields (e.g., those with project-based learning and sustainability goals). Its transferable core is the integrated “cognition-practice-innovation” structure. Practical adoption would first require contextualizing course modules and securing resources for virtual-physical convergence tools. Our experience underscores that institutional support is the foundational enabler for such a transition. The outcomes of these educational reforms have been applied and disseminated to a considerable extent, garnering favourable responses. This has actively propelled the reform of our institution’s practical education system for the Agricultural Hydraulic Engineering programme, thereby contributing to the cultivation of comprehensive innovative talent.

This study is entirely based on the teaching reform practice of a specific engineering discipline: Agricultural Water Conservancy Engineering. This major possesses its own unique curriculum system, faculty structure, ideological and political elements, software and hardware facilities, and quality evaluation system, which may differ to some extent from other disciplines. We must clearly recognize that this will lead to certain limitations in the cross-disciplinary generalization of the research findings. In other words, while the core principles of the research framework proposed in this paper may be transferable, its specific operational modules must undergo discipline-specific reconstruction. Certainly, this research demonstrates that the framework has a positive effect on enhancing the learning outcomes and capabilities of both teachers and students in the short to medium term; however, its impact on the long-term career competitiveness and adaptability of graduates will be an issue requiring long-term follow-up investigation in the future.