学术评价机制与大学的两个世界

Two Worlds of the University:Evaluation Mechanism and Academic Freedom

学术评价机制是学术资源分配的标准和程序,分为"人性化管理"的定性评价机制和"契约化管理"的量化评价机制。人性化管理与定性评价机制实质是一种人治模式,好坏取决于这个学术群体的政体类型。契约化管理和量化评价机制实质是一种法治模式,利弊源自规则治理的固有特点。当代学术评价和大学管理的弊端在于两种评价机制和管理模式的错位。大学学者分属不同的两个世界,不应采取单一的评价机制和管理模式。第一世界适于人性化管理为主的定性评价机制,第二世界适于契约化管理为主的量化评价机制。两个世界具有的学术自由也不同,对应着不同的学术能力。学术评价机制的重要作用,就是从第二世界筛选出具有卓越学术能力的学者,赋予高阶学术自由。第二世界筛选机制的失效,导致初阶学术自由的泛滥和高阶学术自由的匮乏。学术评价标准和大学管理模式的选择,最终是学术发展道路的选择。

Academic evaluation mechanisms are the rules and procedures of academic resources.There are two types:qualitative evaluations of the humanized management and quantitative evaluations of the contractual management.The former is a rule of man model,and how it works depends on the forms of government of an academic group.The latter is a rule of law model,and its virtue and vices are the same with a legal system.The current dilemma of the academic evaluation and the university management is the dislocation of the two types of mechanisms.There are two worlds of the university,different in competition and utility,and hard to be governed by a single mechanism or model.The first world of full professors with tenure is suitable to the qualitative evaluations and the humanized management,and the second world of the associate professor on the tenure track is to the quantitative evaluations and the contractual management.The two worlds are different in academic freedoms too.The function of evaluation mechanisms is to screen the outstanding scholars from the second world and give the higher academic freedom.The failure of the screening function leads the excessiveness of the lower academic freedom and the lack of the higher one.It is finally the choice of the paths of the Chinese academic development.