国家政策中的高校教师学术评价规则审视及启示

Research on the College Teachers Academic Evaluation Rules in China’s Policies and Their Enlightenment

为解决高校教师学术评价中存在的问题,国家不同部门基于不同管理情境颁布了众多政策。以我国现行政策中的高校教师学术评价规则为研究对象,构建了“情境-认知”政策分析二维框架;对不同政策情境及其下的评价规则进行了分析。研究发现:政策中的评价规则是基于各种政策情境形成的复杂系统,不存在一个完整统一的评价规则体系,对政策的把握须匹配其颁布情境;政策中不同类型规则设置也存在较大差异,设置较为详尽和话语强度较高的是选择规则、偿付规则和范围规则,边界规则、职位规则、信息规则和聚合规则政策话语较少、较模糊;分类评价面临操作上的困难与认识论挑战。研究认为,从政策制定看,应完善职位规则、信息规则和偿付规则的政策内容;从政策执行看,高校应加强政策的研究性执行;鉴于分类评价困境,应探索基于教师个体的评价。

In order to solve the sharp contradictions existing in the academic evaluation of college teachers,concerned national departments have promulgated many regulatory policies based on different management scenarios.Rules are the backbone of system analysis.The grasp of evaluation rules can yield an insight into the academic evaluation system of college teachers.Therefore,taking the college teachers academic evaluation rules in China’s current policies as the research object,this paper constructs a twodimensional framework of“situation-cognition”policy analysis,identifies different policy scenarios,and analyzes the policy rules in different scenarios.It is found that the evaluation rules in China’s teachers academic evaluation policy are a complex system based on various policy scenarios,and there is no complete and unified evaluation rule system.The grasp of the policy must match its promulgation scenario.Generally speaking,there are great differences in the setting of different types of rules in the policy.The selection rules,reimbursement rules,and scope rules have more detailed setting and higher discourse intensity,while the boundary rules,position rules,information rules,and aggregation rules have less and relatively vague policy discourse.Classified evaluation also encounters operational difficulties and epistemological challenges.Therefore,from the perspective of policy improvement,the policy contents of position rules,information rules,and reimbursement rules ought to be upgraded.From the perspective of policy implementation,colleges and universities should establish professional policy research and implementation institutions.In view of the plight of classified evaluation,individual-based evaluation should be explored.