Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)aaapublished in(发表于) 2013/12/22 18:54:35 Ministry of education： evaluation of scientific research ability of University no longer rely too much paper
In future, in University of technology evaluation and teacher evaluation, income distribution, technology projects and funded the excessive number of indicators, targets, and over-reliance on papers, projects, patents and other indicators of or will be changed. Recently, the Ministry of education's official website published the views on deepening the reform of scientific and technological evaluation in colleges and universities (hereinafter referred to as the opinion of) made it clear that research evaluation for colleges and universities, teachers, classified evaluation will be implemented, not to engage in sweeping.
Beijing Times reporter Guo Ying
■新政
≫> status
University Science and technology evaluation of myopic light
The opinion that, characterized University developed over time in a unified, quantitative evaluation system of science and technology, with a view of improving the overall quality and innovation-driven development demands of the times, the problem became apparent.
Which, heavy number light, and heavy forms light content, and heavy short-term light long-term of phenomenon still exists; evaluation indicators flattened, and evaluation standard set quantitative, and evaluation method simplistic, and evaluation results utilitarian of, tendencies no get fundamental reverse; classification evaluation implementation not in place, on technology results into, and science universal, work incentive insufficient; technology support teaching and innovation talent training of oriented enough; open evaluation, and long-term evaluation mechanism enough sound.
These problems will seriously affect the sustained and healthy development of University sci-tech work, urgency of the reform tasks.
≫> reform
Reduced research and interests linked to the excessive
The views put forward, a comprehensive reform of the education system for various it projects, and Science Talent project appraisal methods. Improving the quality of science and technology awards, reductions, be extended appropriately baojiang application life. Local educational administrative departments also projects on various technology projects, talents and the reform of the science and technology reward accordingly.
Ministry of education requires all colleges and universities want to change number of examination and evaluation of your technology projects and funding target and target practice. Changes in teachers ' over-reliance on employment, income distribution and irrational use of papers, patents, science and technology indicators, such as number of projects and funding practices, reduce findings associated with excessive distribution of the benefits of science and technology.
Ministry of education requirements, establish an open evaluation mechanisms. Basic research is dominated by peer review, reinforcement of international peer review. Enhance database development and sharing of open, diverse domestic and international experts.
≫> evaluation
Implemented as a different object classification and evaluation
Views under made, introduced classification evaluation, change examination evaluation will be technology project and funding number too indicators of, and target of of practices, for technology activities personnel, and innovation team, and platform base, and research project, different object, according to based research, and application research, and technology transfer, and results into, different work of features, respectively established covers research integrity and style, and innovation quality and contribution, and science combines support talent training, and science spread and universal, and mechanism innovation and open shared, content, science reasonable, and Each has focused on evaluation criteria.
At the same time, establishing long-term evaluation mechanism, to avoid frequent evaluations. Science and technology personnel evaluation cycle in principle no less than 3 years, the implementation period evaluation of young scientists and technicians, creative team and platform base of the evaluation cycle, in principle, not less than 5 years, depending on the performance evaluation can be reduced, relief. Strengthen results-sharing, avoiding duplication of assessment.
≫> expert reviews
Reforms to curb corruption in scientific research
Yesterday, said Chu Chaohui, a researcher at China Academy of educational science, University research institutes there is a big problem, since many people have to use research as a means of corruption. Ministry of education, to reform the evaluation system of scientific research at this time, break the unified quantitative evaluation mechanism conducive to scientific research.
Chu Chaohui said that scientific research is currently the biggest problem is the research evaluation carried out by the Administration, administrations did not understand much research, so that the existence of a single quantitative papers, there are several papers. All along, the evaluation mechanism is an assessment of the year in China, which makes scientific research is naturally tied to officials ' performance, and tied to teacher bonuses. Especially the team name of questions, in fact, lots of paper, all leading scientific name, the "contractor" many scientific shortcomings. In his view, the evaluation of the different direction of scientific research personnel of the Ministry of education focuses on progress, but more independent third-party evaluation should be established to address "who is going to comment on" questions.
Chu Chaohui view, linking theses and research funding is now prevalent in universities, hence running situations. Real professional evaluation mechanism established, only about the nature of this situation is addressed. In addition, the evaluation cycle is at least 3-year extension-evaluation, in his view, the utility of this measure larger the heart and strong young teacher, for teachers are doing research to settle down there is no negative impact.
Classification and evaluation
1
Mainly engaged in innovative research focused on the science and technology personnel representative results of evaluations.
On evaluation of basic research personnel in favour of painstaking research, long-term accumulation, creating significant focus on originality. Needs evaluation researchers to focus on applications, with independent intellectual property rights and focusing on the major technological breakthrough. Evaluation of soft science researchers to serve the decision-making needs, strategic studies, supporting think tanks think tank focusing on construction.
2
Mainly engaged in technology transfer personnel, scientific and technical services and the popularization of science and technology activities focused on the implementation of economic and social benefits and practical contribution of the evaluation.
Encourage in colleges and universities in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State, improving post appointment and post employment mechanism, market-oriented and industry demand, turning technology into real productivity, strengthening collaborative innovation, strengthening technological innovation of enterprise in the subject position; active in science outreach activities, improving scientific literacy for all; training mode of creative talents, improve the quality of innovation talents training.
3
Of science and technology personnel in technical support and service with an emphasis on service quality and effectiveness evaluation.
Encouraged strengthening the post appointment and post employment guidance in colleges and universities, improve the service of technical support staff skills, enhance independent development instruments and equipment.
4
On the issue to resolve the major science and technology innovation team in universities and cooperation mechanism focusing on the overall evaluation.
Around this mechanism for self-construction, representative results, integration of science and education, culture and other aspects of evaluation. To recognize the team results for all participants in the actual contribution of science and technology, which is opposed to false front man with no substantive contributions.
5
On university innovation platform (bodies, base) based on comprehensive performance evaluation focusing on shared and open.
Contribute around innovation, quality, service, science, combines, personnel evaluations, mechanisms for cultural and other aspects. Encouraged innovation platform to deepen combine with science and education, focusing on innovation and commercialization, technical services and the popularization of science. Encourage accepts visiting scholars at home and abroad. Research infrastructure in accordance with the provisions of opening should be open to the public.
≫> related news
National indicators of weakening of the funds for science and technology papers
Yesterday, in China on the China Economic Conference sponsored by the Center for international economic exchanges, Deputy Director of the national development and Reform Commission Zhang xiaoqiang, suggested that the performance evaluation system to reform State funds for science and technology the use of deprecated academician published more than quantity, quantity measures such as, the number of science and technology achievement award, outstanding invention patents, technological achievements conversion rates, promote industry technology progress in evaluation.
Zhang said, improving efficiency of resource use, to reform the management system of national science and technology resources, resolve lots of cake, Rob topic of wasteful duplication, such as illness, solving large numbers of high-end scientific equipment of research institutes and universities without open, sharing, poor utilization of outstanding problems. "Innovation-driven development strategies for effective implementation, in a manner of speaking, most urgently not to increase investment in science and technology or technological innovation on Science and technology innovation, but to accelerate the pace of reform of science and technology, get rid of institutional mechanisms for obstacles. "Zhang xiaoqiang said.
(Original title: evaluation of University scientific research capacity is no longer relied heavily on paper)
今后，在高校科技评价及教师评聘、收入分配中，科技项目与经费数量过分指标化、目标化，过分依赖论文、项目专利等指标的情况或将得到改变。近日，教育部官网发布《关于深化高等学校科技评价改革的意见》（以下简称《意见》）中明确提出，对高校、教师的科研评价，将实施分类评价，不搞一刀切。
京华时报记者郭莹
>>现状
高校科技评价短视轻质
《意见》指出，高校长期以来形成的以统一、量化为特征的科技评价机制，面对全面提高质量和创新驱动发展的时代要求，问题日益显现。
其中，重数轻质、重形式轻内容、重短期轻长远的现象依然存在；评价指标单一化、评价标准定量化、评价方法简单化、评价结果功利化等倾向没有得到根本扭转；分类评价实施不到位，对科技成果转化、科学普及等工作激励不足；科技支撑教学和创新人才培养的导向不够；开放评价、长效评价机制不够健全。
这些问题将严重影响高校科技工作的持续健康发展，改革任务十分紧迫。
>>改革
减少科研与利益过度挂钩
《意见》提出，全面改革教育系统各类科技项目、人才项目和科技奖励的评审办法。提高科技奖励质量，减少数量，适当延长报奖成果的应用年限。地方教育行政部门也要对各类科技项目、人才项目和科技奖励做相应改革。
教育部要求各高校要改变考核评价中将科技项目与经费数量过分指标化、目标化的做法。要改变在教师评聘、收入分配中过分依赖和不合理使用论文、专利、项目和经费数量等科技指标的做法，减少科技评价结果与利益分配过度关联。
教育部要求，建立开放评价机制。基础研究以同行评价为主，大力加强国际同行评价。加强开放、多元的国内外专家数据库建设和共享。
>>评价
按不同对象实施分类评价
《意见》提出，实行分类评价，改变考核评价中将科技项目与经费数量过分指标化、目标化的做法，针对科技活动人员、创新团队、平台基地、科研项目等不同对象，按照基础研究、应用研究、技术转移、成果转化等不同工作的特点，分别建立涵盖科研诚信和学风、创新质量与贡献、科教结合支撑人才培养、科学传播与普及、机制创新与开放共享等内容，科学合理、各有侧重的评价标准。
同时，建立长效评价机制，避免频繁评价。科技活动人员的评价周期原则上不少于3年，对青年科技人员实施聘期评价，创新团队和平台基地的评价周期原则上不少于5年，根据绩效情况可减少、减免评价。加强评价结果共享，避免重复评价。
>>专家点评
改革利于遏制科研腐败
昨天，中国教育科学研究院研究员储朝晖表示，高校科研院所存在很大的问题，很多人已经利用科研作为一种腐败的手段。教育部在此时对科研评价体系进行改革，有利于打破统一量化的评价机制，有利于科学研究。
储朝晖说，高校科研目前最大的问题是科研评价由行政部门进行，很多行政部门并不懂科研，所以才会存在单一的量化论文数量，出现数论文的情况。一直以来，我国的评价机制是一年一评，这使得科研很自然地与领导政绩挂钩，与老师奖金挂钩。特别是此次提出的团队挂名问题，其实，很多论文、科研成果都是给领导挂名，这种“包工头”式的科研方式弊病很多。他认为，此次教育部提出不同科研方向人员的评价重点是进步，但更多的应该建立独立第三方的评价方式，解决“由谁来评”的问题。
储朝晖认为，论文与科研经费挂钩是现在高校的普遍现象，因此才有跑项目等情况出现。真正的专业评价机制建立起来，才会对这种现象有本质的解决。此外，延长评价周期起码3年一评，他认为这项措施对功利心较强的年轻老师影响较大，对于安身立命做研究的老师则不存在负面影响。
■分类评价
对主要从事创新性研究的科技活动人员实行代表性成果为重点的评价。
对基础研究人员的评价以有利于潜心研究、长期积累，催生重大原创性成果为重点。对应用研究人员的评价以聚焦需求，具有自主知识产权和重大技术突破为重点。对软科学研究人员的评价以服务决策需求，形成战略研究报告，支撑思想库智囊团建设为重点。
对主要从事技术转移、科技服务和科学普及的科技活动人员实行经济社会效益和实际贡献为重点的评价。
鼓励高校按照国家相关规定，完善职务聘任和岗位聘用机制，面向市场和产业需求，把科技转化为现实生产力;加强协同创新，强化企业在技术创新中的主体地位;积极开展科学普及活动，提高全民科学素养;创新人才培养模式，提高创新创业人才培养质量。
对从事技术支撑和服务的科技活动人员实行以服务质量与实际效果为重点的评价。
鼓励高校加强职务聘任和岗位聘用的引导，提高技术支撑人员服务技能，加强自主开发仪器设备。
对高校创新团队实行以解决重大科技问题能力与合作机制为重点的整体性评价。
围绕团队自身建设、代表性成果、科教结合、机制文化等方面开展评价。要认可团队科技成果所有参与者的实际贡献，同时反对无实质贡献的虚假挂名。
对高校创新平台（机构、基地）实行以综合绩效和开放共享为重点的评价。
围绕创新质量、服务贡献、科教结合、人才队伍、机制文化等方面开展评价。鼓励创新平台深化科教结合，注重创新成果转化、技术服务和科学普及。鼓励接受国内外访问学者。科研基础设施依照规定应该开放的一律对社会开放。
>>相关新闻
国家科技经费使用弱化论文数量指标
昨天，在中国国际经济交流中心主办的中国经济年会上，国家发改委副主任张晓强提出，要改革国家科技经费使用的绩效评价体系，弱化发表学术论文数量、院士数量、科技成果奖数量等指标，突出发明专利授权、技术成果转化率、促进产业技术进步等方面的考核。
张晓强表示，为提高科技资源使用效率，要改革国家对科技资源的管理体制机制，解决好多单位分蛋糕、抢课题等重复浪费的顽症，解决好科研单位与高校存在的大批高端科研装备不开放、不共享、低利用率的突出问题。“创新驱动发展战略的有效实施，从某种意义上讲，最迫切的不是增大科技投入，也不能就科技创新谈科技创新，而是要加快科技体制改革步伐，破除体制机制障碍。”张晓强说。
（原标题：评判高校科研能力不再过分依赖论文）
赞