期刊文献+

意大利科研评价制度的变革 被引量:8

Evolution of National Research Evaluation Exercise in Italy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 为回应公众提高科研表现的要求,展示其对经济社会的影响,国家科研评价制度正经历较大的变革,本文以意大利VQR科研评价制度为例,从评价对象、方法、指标三方面,展示了国家科研评价制度的一种演化趋势,并就各国制度变革中出现的分歧与争议,进行了一定探讨。 To echo the public desire of improving research performance and demonstrating the impact of research on the economy and society, national research evaluation exercises are undergoing big changes in many countries. Taking Italy VQR as an example, this pa- per analyzes an evolutionary trend of national research evaluation exercises in evaluation objects, methods and indicators. Furthermore, it also discusses the differences and disputes appeared during the changes.
出处 《中国科技论坛》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第2期148-154,共7页 Forum on Science and Technology in China
基金 中国农业科学院资助项目"中国农业科学院绩效评价方案研究"(Y201661801)
关键词 国家科研评价制度 意大利 VQR VTR National research evaluation exercises Italy VQR VTR
  • 相关文献

参考文献21

  • 1Abramo G, D'Angelo CA. Evaluating Research:from Informed Peer Review to Bibliometrics [ J ]. Scientometrics ,2011,87 (3) :499 - 514.
  • 2Rebora G, Turri M. The UK and Italian Research Assessment Exercises Face to Face [J]. Research Policy, 2013,42 (9): 1657 - 1666.
  • 3教育部高等教育评估中心.评估中心代表团访问欧洲三国质量保障机构[EB/OL].http://www.pgzx.edu.cn/modules/jia-oliuyuhezuo-d.jsp?id=10525.
  • 4ANVUR. Bando DI partecipazione [ EB/OL]. [ 2011 - 11 - 7 ]. http ://www. anvur, org/attachments/article/122/bando _vqr_def_ 07_11. pdf.
  • 5Martin BR,Whitley R. The UK Research Assessment Exercise :a Case of Regulatory Capture? In: Reconfiguring Knowledge Produc- tion : Changing Authority Relationships in the Sciences and Their Consequences for Intellectual Innovation. [ M ]. Oxford : Oxford U- niversity Press;2010.
  • 6Henkel M. The Modemisation of Research Evaluation:the Case of the UK[ J]. High Educ, 1999,38 (1) :105 -122.
  • 7Hicks D. Evolving Regimes of Multi-university Research Evaluation [ J ]. Higil Educ, 2009,57 (4) :393 -404.
  • 8Chubin DE, Hackett EJ. Peerless Science:Peer Review and U. S. Science Policy[ M ]. Albany:SUNY Press, 1990.
  • 9Abramo G, D'Angelo C, Di Costa F. National Research Assessment Exercises : a Comparison of Peer Review and Bibliometrics Rank- ings[ J]. Scientometrics,2011,89 (3) :929 - 941.
  • 10龚旭.同行评议公正性的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2004,22(6):613-618. 被引量:67

二级参考文献25

  • 1道格拉斯·C·诺斯.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效[M].上海:上海三联书店,1994..
  • 2Daryl E Chubin, Edward J Hackett. Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy[M], New York: State University of New York Press, 1990.
  • 3Lumann N. Selbststeuerung der Wissenschaft[J].Jahrbuch fur Sozialwissenschaft,1968, 19(2):147-170.
  • 4英国研究理事会咨询委员会(ABRC).同行评议--同行评议调查组给研究理事会咨询委员会的报告[R].国家自然科学基金委员会政策局译(内部资料),1992.
  • 5M Gibbons. Methods for the evaluation of research[J]. International Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education, 1985,(9):79-85.
  • 6史蒂芬·科尔.科学的制造[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2001.
  • 7S Cole, L Rubin, J R Cole. Peer Review in the National Science Foundation: Phase I of a Study[R].Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1978.
  • 8J R Cole,S Cole. Phase II of the Study[R].Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1981.
  • 9Stephen Cole, Jonathan R Cole, Gary A Simon.Chance and Consensus in Peer Review[J].Science, 1981,214(20): 881-886.
  • 10National Science Board. National Science Board and National Science Foundation Staff Task Force on Merit Review (Discussion Report)[R].NSB/MR-96-15, 1996.

共引文献94

同被引文献63

引证文献8

二级引证文献13

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