Construct “four in one” scientific research evaluation system

2022-07-16 0 By

In May 2016, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out at the Symposium on the work of philosophy and social sciences that “to uphold and develop socialism with Chinese characteristics, we must attach great importance to philosophy and social sciences” and “establish a scientific authoritative, open and transparent evaluation system for the achievements of philosophy and social sciences”.In the face of profound changes unseen in the world in a century, the construction of the discipline system, academic system and discourse system of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics should keep pace with The Times and keep pace with The Times. At the same time, it cannot be separated from the guidance and norms of scientific evaluation.The evaluation of research achievements in philosophy and social sciences is a complex and comprehensive systematic project, which is closely related to national economic and social development, system design, public literacy and cultural atmosphere.Adhering to the correct political orientation, value orientation and academic orientation, and constructing a “four-in-one” scientific research evaluation system in line with China’s reality are the inevitable requirements for the reform and development of education in the new era and the construction of a powerful country in education and science and technology.The implementation of peer review is fundamental.Peer review plays an important role in the achievement evaluation system of philosophy and social sciences, but with the continuous expansion and wide application of peer review, many problems have been exposed.For example, the cost is too high, and the reviewer is overburdened and incompetent;The results of the review were blamed for “Matthew effect” caused by interference from non-academic factors;In the environment of “human society” and lack of basic integrity, the phenomenon of misplacement of evaluation affects the fairness and justice of peer review;And so on.Peer review is a qualitative evaluation, subjective evaluation and small peer evaluation. The key to carry out peer review is to improve the democratic and responsibility consciousness of peer review.Therefore, we should actively establish the expert peer review database at home and abroad, formulate the expert evaluation credibility system, explore open peer review and soft peer review, and truly realize the fair, just, standardized and efficient peer review system, and play its due role in the evaluation of philosophy and social sciences.Improving the representative work system is the core.Scientific research achievements are the outputs and results of scientific research, and also the basis for evaluating the level of scholars, disciplines, journals, institutions and countries in scientific research.However, the current simple and indirect “piecework” evaluation, such as “quantity first” and “journal review”, seriously distorts the value orientation of scientific research, and to a certain extent encourages the unhealthy atmosphere of exaggeration and impetuosity, seeking quick success and instant benefits, and even practicing fraud.Representative work system is an important means to reverse this situation.Representative work system has been widely implemented in foreign countries. In recent years, many domestic research institutions have begun to apply it to professional title evaluation, talent evaluation, project declaration and other work.But in the process of concrete operation, there are still many aspects to be improved.For example, how to highlight the original quality and practical contribution of representative work;In the face of different evaluation objects, such as institutions, talents and subjects, how to achieve the differentiation of representative works;How to determine the number, time and form of representative works scientifically and reasonably;And so on.The implementation of classified evaluation is the key.At present, there are still some problems in the evaluation of philosophy and social sciences in China, such as blindly advocating “academic GDP”, applying evaluation indexes and evaluation methods without considering the actual situation.We should jump out of “influence factor worship”, follow the basic principle of “classification evaluation, like comparison”.Just as the basic theory research and the applied countermeasure research have obviously different characteristics in each discipline field, the carrier form of the achievements of philosophy and social science presents the characteristics of diversity, purpose and stage, which determines that the achievements of philosophy and social science research need to be classified and evaluated.To implement classified evaluation and innovate multiple evaluation methods, it is necessary to constantly improve supporting system, standardize classification system and reasonable evaluation method model, and also to use emerging information technology to arouse the recognition of all sectors of society.A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods is guaranteed.To eliminate the “four wei” and “five wei” does not mean to completely deny the results of the paper, nor does it mean to cancel the bibliometric and quantitative indicators.In the late 1980s, Nanjing University was the first to introduce SCI into China’s scientific research evaluation system, which has a special historical significance and positive effect on the international evaluation of natural sciences and philosophy and social sciences in China.Bibliometric analysis has the advantages of being relatively objective, fast and efficient.From the initial indicators such as the number of articles published, cited and impact factor, to the h index and more than 20 h derivative indexes of comprehensive articles published and cited, and to the development of network analysis and evaluation methods, the relevant quantitative evaluation indicators and methods are constantly improving.In fact, qualitative evaluation is often inseparable from the support of quantitative data, quantitative indicators also have qualitative components.The effective combination of quantitative and qualitative depends not only on institutions and policies, but also on the development of big data and artificial intelligence technology and the open sharing of social environment.For example, the creation of semantic quantitative indicators, the development of peer review system based on measurement indicators, etc.To promote the combination of quantitative and qualitative evaluation, it is necessary to ensure the openness and transparency of evaluation indicators and processes, including the disclosure of quantitative indicators, algorithms and original data, as well as the openness of expert information, evaluation content, process and channel of qualitative evaluation, and at the same time ensure the independence of evaluation activities.(The author is a professor at the School of Information Management, Wuhan University, and executive Deputy Director of The Center for Science Evaluation of China;Yang Siluo, Han Ruizhen, Associate Professor, School of Journalism and Communication, Wuhan Sport University