从多维度审视我国目前科研评价体系的研究成果对于提高科研评价的科学性、系统性具有重要意义,也为我国进行科研评价体系改革提供更广阔的视角。文章将2006~2024年7月间我国科研评价体系的研究成果进行梳理归纳,从宏观到微观依次划分为...从多维度审视我国目前科研评价体系的研究成果对于提高科研评价的科学性、系统性具有重要意义,也为我国进行科研评价体系改革提供更广阔的视角。文章将2006~2024年7月间我国科研评价体系的研究成果进行梳理归纳,从宏观到微观依次划分为国家、大学、学科、高校教师四个层面进行分析述评,总结已有科研评价成果的优势在于较为全面和具有广泛的国际比较的视野,不足之处在于研究成果侧重明显、个性与共性的平衡难以把握、国别比较中缺少纵向领域的深入研究,并针对性提出改进建议。Examining the research achievements of China’s current scientific research evaluation system from multiple dimensions is of great significance for enhancing the scientificity and systematicness of scientific research evaluation. It also provides a broader perspective for reforming China’s scientific research evaluation system. This paper organizes and summarizes the research achievements of China’s scientific research evaluation system from 2006 to July 2024, analyzing and reviewing them from macro to micro levels, namely the national, university, discipline, and university faculty levels. It concludes that the strengths of existing research achievements in scientific research evaluation lie in their comprehensiveness and broad international comparative perspectives. However, the shortcomings include an evident focus bias, difficulties in balancing individuality and commonality, and a lack of in-depth longitudinal research in country comparisons. Targeted suggestions for improvement are also proposed.展开更多
文摘从多维度审视我国目前科研评价体系的研究成果对于提高科研评价的科学性、系统性具有重要意义,也为我国进行科研评价体系改革提供更广阔的视角。文章将2006~2024年7月间我国科研评价体系的研究成果进行梳理归纳,从宏观到微观依次划分为国家、大学、学科、高校教师四个层面进行分析述评,总结已有科研评价成果的优势在于较为全面和具有广泛的国际比较的视野,不足之处在于研究成果侧重明显、个性与共性的平衡难以把握、国别比较中缺少纵向领域的深入研究,并针对性提出改进建议。Examining the research achievements of China’s current scientific research evaluation system from multiple dimensions is of great significance for enhancing the scientificity and systematicness of scientific research evaluation. It also provides a broader perspective for reforming China’s scientific research evaluation system. This paper organizes and summarizes the research achievements of China’s scientific research evaluation system from 2006 to July 2024, analyzing and reviewing them from macro to micro levels, namely the national, university, discipline, and university faculty levels. It concludes that the strengths of existing research achievements in scientific research evaluation lie in their comprehensiveness and broad international comparative perspectives. However, the shortcomings include an evident focus bias, difficulties in balancing individuality and commonality, and a lack of in-depth longitudinal research in country comparisons. Targeted suggestions for improvement are also proposed.
