Algorithmic Optimization-Based Skill Development Strategies for Vocational Education Students and Their Employability Enhancement

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

The overall data description of the employment ability

Employment capacity	Mean value	Standard deviation	Capacity category	Ability mean
Communication ability	4.1827	1.1209	General ability	4.1895
Time management	4.2932	0.8584
leadership	3.9949	1.0509
Innovative ability	3.9201	0.7873
Cooperative ability	4.3515	0.9637
Foreign language level	4.1434	0.7001
Emotional control and pressure	4.4407	0.899
Professional knowledge and skills	4.7817	1.0493	Professional ability	4.3231
Employability level	4.1557	1.0983
Employment theory knowledge application level	4.1956	1.0627
Problem-solving ability	4.1594	1.1331
Learning will	4.2646	0.8738	Learning attitude	4.2255
Adaptive ability	4.3524	0.8085
Work dedication	4.0595	0.8704
Career planning ability	4.4001	0.726	Career planning and confidence	4.5053
Job guidance	4.5031	0.6778
Job search	4.6127	1.1034

The results of the analysis of the influence factors of the industry level

Correlation factor	Pearson coefficient	Significance
General ability - employment capacity	0.1924	0.0119
Professional ability - employment capacity	0.2638	0.0000
Attitude to learning - employment ability	0.2509	0.0002
Career planning and confidence - employment	0.2484	0.0003

The influence factors of the logistic model students’ skills were returned

Variable	Model 1			Model 2
	Regression coefficient	Wald value	Sig.	Regression coefficient	Wald value	sig
Gender	0.2807	0.2248	0.6291	0.9187	7.7267	0.0043
An only child	-0.0927	0.0378	0.8484	-1.1071	3.4464	0.0549
Cultural foundation	0.0857	0.0184	0.8329	0.83184	4.6824	0.0257
Professionalism	0.4266	9.6674	0.0019	0.8357	4.7714	0.0236
Teaching plan	0.0285	0.1193	0.639	0.4452	20.0696	0.0000
Textbook change	0.025	0.0183	0.9009	0.1531	12.381	0.0027
-2Log likelihood	95.5051			100.5236
Cox&Snell R2	0.2684			0.2537
Nagelkerke R2	0.6158			0.5856
H-L Tests	Sig = 0.9893			Sig = 0.9885
sig	0.0000			0.0000
Model prediction accuracy(%)	96.81			95.98

The difference analysis results of the status of employment factors

Influencing factor	Difference test	Gender	An only child	Birthplace	Professional type
Cultural foundation	t	2.5263*	4.5574*	0.8505	3.8087*
	Sig.	0.0079	0.0000	0.492	0.0000
Professionalism	t	0.9637	0.0082	0.663	2.5209*
	Sig.	0.2808	0.9995	0.5239	0.0015
Teaching plan	t	3.0756*	0.5653	0.7894	3.4589*
	Sig.	0.0048	0.4662	0.9015	0.0000
Textbook change	t	1.2093	0.3982	0.4642	1.9207
	Sig.	0.1125	0.7986	0.4747	0.063
faculty	t	0.0824	0.8374	0.4486	1.6564
	Sig.	0.8345	0.4716	0.6804	0.1066

Variable selection and specific instructions

Variable	Variable name	Valuation of variables	Impact direction prediction
Y	Job improvement	Hoisting = 1, Unascension = 2
X1	Gender	Male = 1, female = 2	Reverse
X2	An only child	Yes = 1, no = 2	Reverse
X3	Cultural foundation	Middle school and the following = 1 High school = 2 Undergraduate = 3 Graduate student and above = 4	Forward
X4	Professionalism	High = = 1 Medium = 2 Low = = 3	Forward
X5	Teaching plan	Plan = 1 Unplanned = 2	Forward
X6	Textbook change	Timely change of = 1 The change of time and time = 2	Forward
X7	faculty	The teacher strength is strong = 1, The faculty is moderate and moderate = 2, Weak teacher power = 3	Forward