From Singularity to Synergy: Theoretical Evolution and Practical Transformation of Support for Vulnerable Students in Vocational Education from the Perspective of Multi-Stakeholder Governance ()
1. Introduction
As an integral part of national education systems and human resource development, vocational education undertakes the mission of cultivating high-quality technical professionals and facilitating sustainable socio-economic development. Among vocational education students, disadvantaged groups warrant particular attention. “Disadvantaged student groups” refer to those facing multiple overlapping challenges that place them at a significant disadvantage compared to their peers, and they have become a key obstacle to improving educational quality and achieving educational equity. These challenges are operationally defined across five dimensions: Financial hardship, such as coming from low-income families or receiving financial aid; Academic underachievement, such as persistent learning difficulties or weak foundational skills; Psychological distress, such as anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem; Behavioral deviance, such as truancy and disciplinary violations; Weak employability, such as lack of career readiness or internship opportunities. Over the past decades, scholars have continuously explored the identification criteria, support content, implementation pathways, and safeguard mechanisms for disadvantaged students, with research perspectives and theoretical frameworks becoming increasingly enriched.
Early research tended to position educational institutions as the sole responsible entity, focusing primarily on financial assistance and problem remediation, which was characterized by fragmentation, emergency response, and one-way intervention. In recent years, governance theory, synergy theory, and stakeholder theory have been widely integrated into educational research, transcending the single-institution-led collaborative decision-making and implementation framework. The concept of “multi-stakeholder governance,” in which governments, educational institutions, families, enterprises, social organizations, and communities act as co-responsible entities, has profoundly reshaped the research logic and practical pathways for supporting disadvantaged students in vocational education. The shift from single relief to collaborative governance is not merely an expansion of theoretical perspectives but a systemic transformation in support philosophies, stakeholder configurations, and operational models. Meanwhile, existing high-quality research has largely focused on higher vocational colleges or general higher education settings. However, by focusing on transferable governance principles (collaborative mechanisms, digital support) and intervention logics (developmental empowerment), the findings can be adapted to secondary vocational education contexts, while acknowledging potential differences in implementation intensity and resource availability. This paper provides a narrative review of the existing literature on research progress in this field, aiming to offer significant theoretical and practical implications for deepening research related to secondary and higher vocational education in China and for optimizing support practices.
2. Theoretical Evolution of Support Research for Vulnerable Students in Vocational Education
Research on supporting vulnerable students in vocational education has evolved in tandem with the reform and development of vocational education itself, presenting distinct theoretical foundations and research focuses at different stages. Overall, it demonstrates a clear progression from singularity to multiplicity and from a relief-oriented to an empowerment-oriented logic. The four historical stages are demarcated based on a combination of key policy shifts and turning points in the academic literature. The first stage (1990s-2005) aligns with the large-scale expansion of vocational education and the initial establishment of national tuition exemption and grant policies. The second stage (2006-2015) reflects the policy shift toward connotative development and the influx of psychological and ecological theories. The third stage (2016-2020) is triggered by the state’s explicit promotion of “modernization of educational governance systems” and the widespread adoption of big data. The fourth stage (2021-present) corresponds to the era of “high-quality development” and digital transformation in vocational education.
2.1. Single Relief Dominance: Initial Exploration Centered on Economic Alleviation (1990s-2005)
From the 1990s to around 2005, vocational education entered a phase of large-scale expansion, and issues related to vulnerable students gradually emerged, with relevant research still in its nascent stage. During this period, research was primarily grounded in social relief theory, equating vulnerable students with economically disadvantaged groups, and the core goal of support was basic subsistence security. In this framework, social relief theory explains why early research focused almost exclusively on financial aid and tuition waivers—vulnerability was framed as a resource deficit requiring material transfer. Research focus was mainly placed on the construction of financial aid policies for vocational students, criteria for identifying students in need, and mechanisms for grant distribution and management.
Cai (2024) noted in their research on the evolution of financial aid policies for secondary vocational students that early support in vocational education mainly adopted the form of universal relief, with the core task of addressing tuition fees and basic living needs, while lacking systematic attention to academic, psychological, and behavioral difficulties [1]. Similarly, Qiu et al. (2023) pointed out in a historical review of financial aid policies that support concepts at this stage emphasized basic security, with a single subject and simple methods, failing to form systematic educational thinking [2]. Constrained by limited research perspectives, the theoretical system remained narrow, and support concepts were confined to the level of “transfusion-style” relief. Educational institutions and public sectors were regarded as the only responsible entities, with insufficient attention paid to student agency, long-term development capacity, and the participation of social forces.
2.2. Expansion of Multi-Dimensional Intervention: Theoretical Enrichment Oriented to Problem Remediation (2006-2015)
From 2006 to 2015, the focus of vocational education shifted from quantitative expansion to connotative development. As the types of vulnerable students became increasingly diverse, research gradually broke through the framework of single financial support and formed a pattern of multi-dimensional intervention. Human capital theory, positive psychology, and Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory were successively integrated into the research system, extending support content to economic, academic, psychological, and behavioral domains.
Within this stage, human capital theory explains why support extended from mere relief to investment in skill development and academic guidance—viewing students as future productive assets. Positive psychology explains the shift from fixing deficits to cultivating resilience and self-efficacy. Ecological systems theory accounts for the need for multi-level interventions (family, school, community) by demonstrating that student difficulties arise from interactions across micro-, meso-, and macro-systems. From the perspective of human capital theory, scholars emphasized that supporting vulnerable students is essentially an investment in human capital, which requires strengthening skill development and academic guidance alongside financial assistance to combine relief with intellectual empowerment. The application of positive psychology shifted research focus from problem remediation to the cultivation of positive psychological traits such as resilience and self-efficacy, addressing the deep-seated constraints of psychological poverty on student development [3]. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory further revealed that student difficulties result from interactions between micro-systems (family, school), meso-systems (interactions between family and school), and macro-systems (social culture), thus requiring the construction of a multi-level, three-dimensional comprehensive intervention system [4]. Although theoretical research expanded significantly during this period, educational institutions remained the core implementer, with families, enterprises, and social forces mostly regarded as auxiliary roles, and the concept of collaborative governance had not yet taken shape.
2.3. Establishment of Multi-Stakeholder Governance: Paradigm Shift Centered on Collaborative Governance (2016-2020)
Since 2016, with the vigorous promotion of the modernization of educational governance systems and governance capacity, multi-stakeholder governance has become the core paradigm of research on supporting vulnerable students in vocational education. Polycentric governance theory, stakeholder theory, and precision governance theory together constitute the theoretical support system of this stage.
Polycentric governance theory, proposed by Ostrom, breaks the mindset of single-stakeholder governance, advocating the joint participation of governments, educational institutions, enterprises, social organizations, and other parties in public educational affairs to improve governance efficiency through clear division of powers and responsibilities and negotiated cooperation [5]. Stakeholder theory further clarifies the responsibility boundaries and interest demands of all participating entities, emphasizing the construction of a collaborative mechanism featuring shared responsibility, resource sharing, and complementary advantages. Meanwhile, the popularization of big data technology has driven the in-depth application of precision governance theory, shifting research focus to the precise identification of vulnerable students, precise matching of support resources, and precise evaluation of support effects, and advocating a personalized “one student, one strategy” support model [6]. Zhou (2024) proposed that against the background of industry-education integration, vocational education itself is characterized by multi-stakeholder participation, and support for vulnerable students should naturally move toward collaborative governance [7]. Thus, research on supporting vulnerable students in vocational education completed a paradigm shift from single-stakeholder control to multi-stakeholder collaborative governance.
2.4. Deepening of Whole-Cycle Empowerment: Systematic Improvement Aimed at High-Quality Development
(2021-Present)
In recent years, with the continuous advancement of high-quality development initiatives in vocational education, research on supporting vulnerable students has deepened toward whole-cycle, digital, and high-quality empowerment within the framework of multi-stakeholder governance. The concept of life-cycle education has been widely adopted, advocating that support work cover the entire process of admission adaptation, on-campus cultivation, graduation employment, and career development to form a closed-loop support system [8]. Digital governance theory promotes the in-depth integration of modern technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence with support practices, improving the accuracy and efficiency of support through student digital profiling, intelligent early warning systems, and smart support platforms [9].
In line with the typological characteristics of vocational education, the concept of integrating moral education with skill development and combining work with study has been further incorporated into the support system, emphasizing the coordinated advancement of skill improvement, professional literacy cultivation, and moral character shaping [10]. A localized theoretical system has gradually taken shape, which is based on multi-stakeholder governance, supported by digital empowerment, and aimed at lifelong development.
3. Practical Transformation of Support for Vulnerable Students from the Perspective of Multi-Stakeholder Governance
Driven by theoretical evolution, the practice of supporting vulnerable students in vocational education has undergone systematic changes, presenting clear transformation characteristics in terms of stakeholder structure, content system, operation mode, and value orientation.
3.1. Support Subjects: From Single Institutional Leadership to Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration
Traditional support models exhibited obvious “institution-centrism”, with insufficient participation of families, enterprises, and social forces, resulting in low collaborative efficiency. The concept of multi-stakeholder governance has promoted the transformation of support subjects from singularity to multiplicity, gradually forming a collaborative structure featuring public-sector coordination, institutional leadership, family responsibility, enterprise participation, and social support. Zhao and Sun (2025) conducted a theoretical study on home-school-community collaborative education in higher vocational colleges, systematically analyzing the theoretical framework for integrating family, school, and social education resources, and clarifying basic principles and operational mechanisms, thus providing theoretical reference for multi-actor collaborative support [11]. In policy practice, China’s inter-departmental coordination mechanism—exemplified by the “National Student Loan Inter-Ministerial Coordination Group” (with the National Student Aid Center as its routine office under the Ministry of Education)—demonstrates how public sectors integrate resources across education, finance, civil affairs, and poverty alleviation departments.
Public sectors have transformed from policy-makers to overall coordinators, integrating public resources from civil affairs, rural revitalization, education, and other departments through inter-departmental linkage; educational institutions assume core organizational functions, coordinating on-campus educational resources and off-campus cooperation channels to build collaborative support carriers; families have shifted from passive cooperation to active participation, strengthening guardianship responsibilities and psychological companionship functions; enterprises have deeply embedded themselves in the support process by establishing scholarships and grants, providing internship positions, and participating in dual-tutor education; communities and social organizations supplement psychological services, legal aid, and social integration support [12]. Multi-stakeholder collaboration has effectively broken the dilemma of “isolated efforts by educational institutions” and achieved resource integration and functional complementarity.
3.2. Support Content: From Unidirectional Financial
Transfusion to Multi-Dimensional Hematopoietic
Empowerment
Early support centered on financial assistance, representing a typical “transfusion-style” relief that could not fundamentally resolve students’ developmental difficulties. From the perspective of multi-stakeholder governance, support content has gradually expanded into a comprehensive system integrating financial aid, academic guidance, psychological support, behavioral regulation, and employment assistance, realizing the shift from “transfusion” to “hematopoiesis”.
Zhang and Shen (2025) provide a relevant case: from the perspective of positive psychology, their study revealed the key role of cultivating positive psychological traits, shaping positive subjective experiences, and constructing a supportive social environment in developmental funding work in higher vocational colleges, offering empirical evidence for the transformation of funding from “security-oriented” to “development-oriented” [13]. Similarly, through industry-education cooperation, many vocational institutions now provide career planning, job recommendation, and employment follow-up services to enhance students’ employment competitiveness.
Financial support has shifted from universal distribution to dynamic precision assistance, combining work-study programs and temporary hardship subsidies to improve the efficiency of security; academic support adopts stratified teaching, peer tutoring, and enterprise skill training to make up for students’ learning gaps; psychological support establishes a full-chain mechanism including evaluation and screening, individual counseling, group guidance, and crisis intervention to alleviate students’ negative emotions such as anxiety and inferiority; employment support relies on industry-education cooperation to provide career planning, job recommendation, and employment follow-up services, enhancing students’ employment competitiveness [3]. The expansion of support content places greater emphasis on cultivating students’ endogenous motivation and sustainable development capacity.
3.3. Support Mode: From Fragmented Intervention to
Whole-Cycle Systematic Governance
Traditional support was often temporary, scattered, and emergency-oriented, lacking unified planning and long-term mechanisms, making it difficult to achieve sustainable effects. The concept of multi-stakeholder governance has driven the transformation of support modes toward systematization, whole-cycle management, and standardization, with precise identification, collaborative operation, process management, and digital support as core features. Wang (2023) provides longitudinal evidence for this transformation: in a doctoral study tracking higher vocational students from admission to two years post-graduation, a whole-cycle career adaptability intervention was found to significantly improve both retention rates and employment quality [8]. In practice, some vocational institutions have established full-cycle student aid record systems. For instance, Hunan Engineering Vocational and Technical College has constructed a “six-dimension, six-drive” targeted funding education system, addressing multiple dimensions including ideology, academics, psychology, capability, and employment, enabling dynamic tracking from enrollment to graduation and transforming funding from “financial assistance” to “growth empowerment.” Meanwhile, the in-depth application of smart support platforms, digital profiling, and intelligent early warning has promoted the transformation of support modes toward intelligence and personalization.
In practice, multi-dimensional evaluation indicator systems have been established based on big data to dynamically identify the types and risk levels of students’ difficulties, enabling targeted strategies; collaborative efficiency has been improved through the establishment of joint meetings, information sharing, and division-of-labor mechanisms among schools, families, communities, and enterprises; support work runs through the entire process of pre-admission investigation, on-campus classified intervention, graduation support, and post-employment follow-up, forming a closed-loop management system. Meanwhile, the in-depth application of smart support platforms, digital profiling, and intelligent early warning has promoted the transformation of support modes toward intelligence and personalization.
3.4. Support Philosophy: From Problem Remediation to Developmental Empowerment
In the past, research and practice often regarded vulnerable students as “problematic subjects”, focusing on correcting deviations and eliminating difficulties while ignoring students’ subjectivity and developmental potential. The concept of multi-stakeholder governance has driven the shift of support philosophy toward developmental empowerment, with greater emphasis on respecting individual differences, stimulating internal motivation, and promoting all-round development. A compelling example comes from Wang, Wang, and Chen (2025), who conducted a qualitative study on “counterattack” vocational students—those who overcame early disadvantages. Their findings showed that successful support was not about deficit remediation but about fostering academic resilience through student agency, peer mutual aid, and recognition from teachers and employers [14]. This study directly illustrates the shift from viewing students as passive recipients to active agents of their own growth.
In practice, students are encouraged to participate in the design and implementation of support programs, realizing the transition from passive recipients to active growth through self-help, mutual aid, and voluntary services. Support goals are no longer limited to overcoming short-term difficulties but focus on cultivating core competencies such as psychological resilience, professional ability, and social adaptability, highlighting the essential requirements of holistic education in vocational education.
4. Research Consensus, Controversies and Future Prospects
4.1. Research Consensus and Existing Controversies
A comprehensive review of existing literature shows that a relatively stable consensus has been formed in the field of research on supporting vulnerable students in vocational education. It is widely acknowledged that multi-stakeholder governance is an inevitable direction to address support dilemmas and improve educational effectiveness, requiring the construction of a multi-stakeholder, whole-cycle, and precision-oriented support system; support work must break through the single financial aid model and move toward multi-dimensional empowerment covering economy, academics, psychology, and employment; research and practice should uphold the value orientation of educational equity, balancing individual development needs and the high-quality development goals of vocational education [15].
Meanwhile, several controversies remain in current research. First, there is no unified consensus on the division of powers and responsibilities among multiple stakeholders, with disagreements on the definition of leadership and the allocation of responsibilities. Second, debates persist regarding the boundaries and ethics of precision support—ultra-precise identification may lead to privacy breaches, labeling risks, and excessive administrative costs, and how to balance efficiency, equity, and ethical norms remains to be further explored. Third, research outcomes show obvious regional differences: urban vocational institutions focus more on psychological and employment support, while regional secondary vocational institutions prioritize enrollment retention and financial aid, resulting in insufficient universality of research results.
4.2. Future Prospects
In the future, research can be advanced in five key aspects: strengthening localized theoretical construction, which is based on the practical development of vocational education, integrating excellent traditional culture and modern educational concepts to build a context-adapted multi-stakeholder governance support theory system; enhancing empirical research and effect evaluation by conducting long-term, large-sample follow-up surveys and establishing a comprehensive evaluation indicator system covering economic improvement, academic progress, psychological growth, and employment quality to provide empirical basis for practical optimization; focusing on the innovation of collaborative mechanisms by conducting in-depth research on the division of powers and responsibilities, resource coordination, process connection, and assessment and incentive mechanisms among multiple stakeholders to form replicable and promotable collaborative support models; deepening research on digital support by exploring the standardized application of big data and artificial intelligence in precise identification, intelligent intervention, and personalized training, while balancing technical efficiency and ethical security; paying attention to special groups and regional differences by conducting classified research on rural left-behind students, disabled students, ethnic minority students, and underdeveloped regions to improve the pertinence and adaptability of support [16].
5. Conclusion
Over years of development, research on supporting vulnerable students in vocational education has evolved from single-stakeholder relief to multi-stakeholder collaborative governance and from fragmented intervention to systematic support, shifting from basic financial assistance to comprehensive empowerment. Moving forward, research should focus on strengthening localized theoretical construction, enhancing empirical research, innovating collaborative mechanisms, deepening digital support, and addressing special groups and regional differences to promote high-quality support systems and uphold educational equity.
Funding
This work was supported by the Taizhou Technician College 2025 Annual Regular Research Project (grant number: 2025CGYJ05) to Zhongyi Ming.