高校教师职称评审制度的演变特征——基于A大学的文本分析

Research on the Evolution Characteristics of the Evaluation System of University Teachers' Professional Titles—Text Analysis Based on A University

高校教师职称评审制度对促进教师专业发展、提升学校管理水平具有重要作用,因此,建立科学、规范的教师职称评审制度非常必要。对A大学三十年来教师职称评审制度的文本分析表明,其评审基本条件逐步严格、评审组织逐渐规范、评审程序日益完善、评审方式更加科学。其演变动力来自于政治体制变革、高等教育管理体制改革、高校内部管理体制改革、高校教师职称评审制度存在的问题。其呈现出以下演变特征:价值取向由社会本位转变为社会需求和以人为本相结合,评审标准由简单、宽松转向复杂、严格,评审权力由政府主导走向政府与高校相结合,评审方法由主观、单一变为客观、多元,评审过程由封闭、笼统走向开放、规范。高校教师职称评审制度不断发展完善,效果明显,但以下方面仍有待完善:处理好价值导向中应然与实然的关系、处理好评审标准中质量与数量的关系、处理好评审主体中行政与学术的关系、处理好评审程序中规范与繁琐的关系、处理好评审制度中稳定与发展的关系。

The evaluation system of professional titles has vigorous effect on promoting teachers professional development and improving level of university management. Thus,it is very necessary to establish a scientific and standard evaluation system of professional titles. Through the textual analysis of the evaluation system of professional titles in thirty years from A University,it indicates that its basic conditions for review become strict step by step,the evaluation organization is gradually standardized,the procedures of promotion have been improving and the method seems scientific. The motive force of its evolution comes from the reform of the political system,the reform of the management system of higher education,the reform of the internal management system of universities,and the problems existing in the system of professional titles evaluation of university teachers. It shows the following evolution features: the value orientation is changed from social standard to social demand and human oriented; the judging standard is changed from being simple and loose to complex and strict; the power of evaluation is combined with the government and universities instead of being led by the government; the evaluation method is changed from being subjective and unitary to objective and pluralistic; and the evaluation process is changed from being closed and general to open and standard. The title evaluation system of university teachers has been continuously developed and perfected,and the effect is obvious,but the followings need to be done: dealing with the relationship between the"ought to be " and the"reality" in value orientation; handling the relationship between quality and quantity; handling the relationship between administration and academic in the subject of review; dealing with the relationship between standardization and complexity in the evaluation procedure and the relationship between stability and development in the evaluation system.