以量化为基础以代表作为主的综合化学术评价制度构建——基于S大学的经验
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

G644.4

基金项目:

教育部人文社会科学研究专项任务项目"以量化为基础以代表作为主的综合化学术评价制度构建"(13JDXF004)


Establishment of comprehensive academic evaluation system based on quantification and mainly on representative work: Experiences of S University
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    高校学术评价的重点和基础在于科研成果和教学科研人员的评价,而在教学科研人员的评价中专业化技术职务的评聘更为典型和引人注目。S大学多年来坚持人才评价制度改革,已建立并形成了一套相对完善的以量化为基础以代表作为主的综合化评价体系,在实践中充分展现出了规范性、公正性和合理性。这一制度以2016年新修的《专业技术职务(教师)评聘工作办法》为主件,以《教师系列职务评审量化办法》等为附件,其内容包括了指导思想和评聘原则、组织机构、工作程序、申报资格及业绩的认定、对特殊人员的聘任等方方面面;其突出特点是评价过程公开透明、量化办法全面合理、坚持同行专家评价、代表作评审严格、注重分类指导与评价、配套制度完善。总结吸收S大学学术人才评价的经验和做法,我们认为构建以量化为基础以代表作为主的学术评价制度,其量化评价应不同于以往以科研为主、以成果数量和项目级别等为主的方法,要既评科研,也评教学,既看数量,也看质量,同时也不忽视思想政治表现与职业道德情操。与量化评价重在全面、客观和准确地揭示教学科研人员的学术水平和学术贡献不同,代表作评价主要在于测度、考量被评人的科研水平和能力。评审代表作,外审专家的遴选至关重要,并应采取措施,尽力排除人际关系等干扰。对于人文社会科学学术评价来说,单纯量化的办法存在诸多弊端,而单纯代表作评价亦有不少问题。相较而言,实行以量化为基础以代表作为主的综合化评价制度,不失为保证学术评价科学合理、公平公正且具可操作性的正确选择。

    Abstract:

    The focus and base of academic evaluation in colleges and universities lie in the evaluation of scientific research achievements and teaching and research personnel, while the evaluation and appointment of professional technical posts are more typical and attractive in teaching and research personnel evaluation. Persisting in talent evaluation system reform for many years, S University has established a comprehensive evaluation system based on quantification and mainly on representative work, which fully demonstrates normativeness, fairness and rationality in practice. The system is based on the 2016 revised "Measures for (Teachers') Professional Technical Post Evaluation and Appointment", which is attached with "Quantitative Measures for Evaluation of Teachers' Posts". Its contents include guiding ideology and evaluation principles, organizational structure, working procedures, qualification and performance appraisal, appointment of special personnel, etc. Its prominent features are open and transparent evaluation process, comprehensive and reasonable quantitative methods, adhering to peer evaluation, rigorous representative work evaluation, classified guidance and evaluation, and sound supporting system. Drawing from S University's experience, in establishing academic evaluation system based on quantification and mainly on representative work, the quantitative evaluation should focus on both scientific research and teaching, both quantity and quality, both ideological and political performance and professional ethics, and should be different from the previous one which mainly focuses on scientific research, achievements quantity and project level. Quantitative evaluation is to reveal the academic level and contribution of teaching and research personnel comprehensively, objectively and accurately, while representative work evaluation mainly measures scientific research level and ability. Selection of external experts is very important in evaluating representative works, and measures should be taken to eliminate interpersonal interference. For academic evaluation of humanities and social sciences, simple quantitative method and simple representative work evaluation both have problems. The comprehensive evaluation system based on quantification and mainly on representative work might be a correct choice to ensure that the academic evaluation is scientific, reasonable, fair and operable.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

张积玉.以量化为基础以代表作为主的综合化学术评价制度构建——基于S大学的经验[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2019,25(6):84-96. DOI:10.11835/j.issn.1008-5831.pj.2019.05.004

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2019-05-10
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2019-09-21
  • 出版日期: