期刊文献+

科学发展观与人文社会科学成果评价 被引量:2

Scientific Development Concept and Evaluation of the Achievements in the Humanities and Social Sciences
下载PDF
导出
摘要 科学发展观的核心是以人为本,目的是促进社会和人的全面发展,人文社会科学是一种以人为研究对象的科学。以科学发展观来指导人文社会科学成果评价,必须完善成果评价制度,必须改变那种只重政策研究而轻视基础研究的倾向,强调学术文化研究的内在价值,统筹学术价值与社会价值的和谐,建立人文社会科学评价的人文科学标准。 The purpose of the people - oriented scientific development concept is to promote the all - round development of society and human beings. And the man - targeted ideal is usually embodied in the research in the humanities and social sciences. Guided by the scientific development concept, we should try to improve the system for evaluating the achievements in the humanities and social sciences by changing the practice where stress is only laid on study of policies instead of fundamentals, by emphasizing the intrinsic value of academic studies, by balancing the academic value and the social value of research work, and by establishing standards for the humanities and social sciences.
作者 刘梅
出处 《高校教育管理》 2007年第6期13-16,共4页 Journal of Higher Education Management
关键词 科学发展观 人文社会科学 成果评价 scientific development concept the humanities and social sciences evaluation of achievements
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

  • 1(德)黑格尔(Hegl,G.W.F.)著,朱光潜.美学[M]商务印书馆,1981.

同被引文献30

  • 1范松仁.高校学术道德的缺失与重振[J].天津职业大学学报,2005,14(4):43-46. 被引量:12
  • 2刘大椿.人文社会科学评价的限制与超越[J].中国人民大学学报,2007,21(2):149-156. 被引量:29
  • 3Michele Lamont,2005. Peer Evaluation in the Social Sciences and the Humanities Compared The Unites States, United Kingdom, and Frnace[J]. Report prepared for the Social Sciences and Humanities resear Council of Canada, Department of Sociology,, March 24,2005, Harvard University, www. wjh. harvard, edu/-mlamont/SSHRC-peer, pdf, pp. 5.
  • 4Policy Researcg in Engineering, Scince and Technology University of Manchester[J]. Final Report Prepared for Higher Education Funding for England( HEFCE), April 2000, www. unido, org/fileadmin/import/12273_15KeenanAbstraet, pdf, pp. 61-62.
  • 5David H. Guston,The Expanding Role of Peer Review Process in the United States,Public Research, Innovation and Technology Policies in the USA[J]. Bloustein School of Planning & Public Policy,Rutgers,The State University of New Jersey, www. cspo. org/products/papers/peerreview, pdf, pp. 34-35.
  • 6Travis,G. D. L. ,and Harry M. Collins. 1991. New Light on Old Boys:Cognitive and Institutional Particularism in the Peer Re view System[J]. Science,Technology and Human Values 16(3):322-341.
  • 7Guetzkow,Joshua, Michele Lamont and Gregoire Mallatd. 2004. What is originality in the Social Xciences and Humanities[J]. American Sociological Review 69: 190-212.
  • 8Aalto University, Striving for Excellence,Research Assessment Exercise 2009[EB/OL]. www. aalto, fi/fi/research/rae/aalto_rae _2009_panel_reports. pdf,pp 36 37.
  • 9Gibbons, Michel,Camille Limogers. H elga Nowotny, Somon Schwartzman, Peter Scott and Martin Trudow(eds). 1994. The New Production of Knowledge[M]. London:Sage Pubulieations.
  • 10Callon, Michel,Pierre Lascoumes and Yan Barthe, Agir Dans un Monde Incertain, Essai Sur la Democratie Technique[M]. Paris: 2001 Seuil.

引证文献2

二级引证文献12

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部