一流学科与学科排名的对比研究——基于教育部学科评估、ESI和QS学科排名的一流学科对比分析

Subject Ranking and selection of first-class disciplines

一流学科是建设世界一流大学的基础,其遴选和评估绕不开学科排名。有研究指出一流学科名单是在教育部学位中心学科评估、ESI排名和QS排名并结合国家发展需要的基础上产生的,但并未有研究对此进行深入地分析与验证。本文在教育部学位中心2012年学科评估结果、ESI数据库2017年3月更新的学科排名和2017年初的QS学科排名数据的基础上,对我国双一流建设的一流学科名单数据进行详细地对比分析。研究验证了双一流学科主要是以教育部学科评估结果为主,兼顾ESI排名和QS学科排名的说法,学科评估位列前两名的一级学科(除解放军信息工程大学的测绘科学与技术外)均入选一流学科名单,同一高校中与入选一流学科的一级学科相关性较小且排名位于前2‰的ESI学科或进入QS排名的学科有可能入选双一流学科。该研究系统地解释了双一流学科名单公布以来产生的争论,同时也进一步为"双一流"建设的学科评估问题提供建议。

First-rate disciplines are the foundation for building world-class universities,and their selection and evaluation cannot be separated from the discipline rankings.Based on the results of the 2012 subject ranking of the Ministry of Education’s degree center,the ESI subject ranking updated in March 2017,and the QS subject ranking 2017,this paper makes a detailed comparative analysis between the three subject rankings and top-class subject list.The study verified that the first-class disciplines are mainly based on the results of the 2012 discipline ranking of the Ministry of Education’s degree center,taking into account the ESI subject ranking and QS subject rankings.The subjects ranked top two in the 2012 subject ranking of the Ministry of Education(except the Geomatics Science and Technology of the PLA Information Engineering University)are selected into the list of first-class subject,the ESI subject ranked in the top 2‰subject or the subject entering the QS top 50 ranking may be selected as first-class subject.The study systematically explained the controversy that has arisen since the publication of the list of double first-class subject,and also provides advice on the subject assessment of double first-class construction.