Review on Reform of Research Evaluation in Past Decade

Authors

Fang XU, Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, ChinaFollow
Xiaoxuan LI, Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, ChinaFollow

Keywords

research evaluation; reform; “Three Evaluations”; breaking “Four Only”

Document Type

World Science and Technology Power Construction - Last Ten Years Review and Future Trend of Science and Technology of China - Strategy & Policy Decision Research

Abstract

Over the past decade, there have been many scientific and technological evaluation reform documents and great efforts represented by "Three Evaluations" and breaking "Four Only", which have achieved good results but the gap is still huge. This reform has better eliminated the surface problems such as unreasonable evaluation quantity, frequency, and index in the "Three Evaluations". The reform has been initiated in the reward system, talent plan, and project fund management, but is still halfway. The reform of scientific and technological evaluation has not yet achieved a fundamental improvement in the value orientation of guiding scientific researchers to pursue excellence from the bottom, and the problem of new evaluation approach remains to be solved.

First page

603

Last Page

612

Language

Chinese

Publisher

Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences

References

1 罗旭. 中组部中宣部科技部等十二家单位联合改进科研项目评审人才评价机构评估. 光明日报, 2015-01-30(01). Luo X. 12 units jointly improved the evaluation of "talent, project and institute evaluation". Guangming Daily, 2015-01-30(01). (in Chinese)

2 龚放, 曲铭峰. 南京大学个案:SCI引入评价体系对中国大陆大学基础研究的影响. 高等理科教育, 2010, 1(3):4-17.

Gong F, Qu M F. A case study of Nanjing University:The influence of introducing SCI into assessment system on the quality of basic research in mainland Chinese universities. Higher Education of Sciences, 2010, 1(3):4-17. (in Chinese)

3 万钢. 深化科技体制改革,建立更加完善的评价体系和奖励制度. 中国高校科技, 2012, (8):79-80.

Wan G. Deepen the reform of science and technology system and establish a more perfect evaluation system and reward system. Chinese University Technology, 2012, (8):79-80. (in Chinese)

4 刘云. 破"四唯"能解决中国科技评价的问题症结吗. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2020, 41(8):3-6.

Liu Y. Can "Po Siwei" policy solve the crux of China's science and technology evaluation. Science of Science and Management of S&T, 2020, 41(8):3-6. (in Chinese)

5 潘教峰. "破四唯"和"立新标"并举完善科技人才评价体系. 中国科技人才, 2021, (5):2-3.

Pan J F. Improving the evaluation system of scientific and technological talents by "PO Siwei" and "LI Xinbiao". Chinese S&T talents, 2021, (5):2-3. (in Chinese)

6 徐芳, 李超平, 李晓轩, 等. 关于"三评"改革效果的调查分析. 科学与社会, 2019, 9(3):22-33.

Xu F, Li C P, Li X X, et al. Investigation and analysis on the effect of "Sanping" reform. Science and Society, 2019, 9(3):22-33. (in Chinese)

7 龚旭. 同行评议公正性的影响因素分析. 科学学研究, 2004, 22(6):613-618.

Gong X. An analysis on the fairness of peer review and its elements. Studies in Science of Science, 2004, 22(6):613-618. (in Chinese)

8 徐芳, 李晓轩. 跨越科技评价的"马拉河". 中国科学院院刊, 2017, 32(8):879-886.

Xu F, Li X X. To cross the Mara river:Thoughts on breakthrough point of research evaluation reform in China. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2017, 32(8):879-886. (in Chinese)

9 李晓轩, 徐芳. "四唯"如何破:中国科学院研究所评价的实践和启示. 中国科学院院刊, 2020, 35(12):1431-1438.

Li X X, Xu F. How to break the "Siwei"? -Practice and enlightenment based on research institute evaluation of Chinese Academy of Sciences. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2020, 35(12):1431-1438.(in Chinese)

10 徐芳, 李晓轩. 破"四唯"需要角马理论. 中国科技人才, 2021, (1):1-6.

Xu F, Li X X. Breaking the "Siwei" needs "the Theory of Wildebeest". Science and Technology Talents of China, 2021, (1):1-6. (in Chinese)

11 乔纳森·科尔, 斯蒂芬·科尔. 科学界的社会分层. 赵佳荃, 译. 北京:华夏出版社, 1989.

Cole J, Cole S. Social stratification in Science. Translated by Zhao J Q. Beijing:Huaxia Publishing House, 1989. (in Chinese)

12 陈光, 陈凯华, 龚旭, 等. 优化科学基金同行评议机制的思考. 中国科学院院刊, 2021, 36(12):1427-1433.

Chen G, Chen K H, Gong X, et al. Thoughts on optimizing peer review mechanism of science foundation. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2021, 36(12):1427-1433. (in Chinese)

13 唐华, 宋朝晖, 刘克, 等. 信息科学部RCC评审机制试点工作实践与思考. 中国科学基金, 2022, 36(1):75-80.

Tang H, Song Z H, Liu K, et al. Practice and considerations on the pilot work of the RCC review mechanism in department of information sciences. Bulletin of National Natural Science Foundation of China, 2022, 36(1):75-80. (in Chinese)

14 白春礼. 以重大成果产出为导向改革科技评价. 中国科学院院刊, 2012, 27(4):407-410.

Bai C L. Reform of CAS S&T evaIuation:Toward a major R&D outcome-oriented system. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2012, 27(4):407-410. (in Chinese)

15 国家科技奖励制度改革向纵深推进. 中国科技奖励, 2020, (2):18-19.

The reform of the national science and technology reward system is advancing in depth. China Science and Technology Award, 2020, (2):18-19. (in Chinese)

16 肖尤丹. 改革科技奖励亟需回归制度常识. 科学与社会,2015,5(4):24-30.

Xiao Y D. Reforming S & T awards needs returning to the institutional common sense. Science and Society, 2015, 5(4):24-30. (in Chinese)

17 孟宪飞, 李正风, 张寒. 我国科技奖励制度的改革及其问题——基于行动者网络理论的思考. 科学学研究, 2021, 39(2):193-198.

Meng X F, Li Z F, Zhang H. The reform of national science and technology awards and its problems in the New Era:Based on the perspective of the actor network theory. Studies in Science of Science, 2021, 39(2):193-198. (in Chinese)

18 姚玉鹏. 对我国科研资助体系存在问题及深化体制改革的思考. 中国科学基金, 2011, 25(1):26-29.

Yao Y P. Defects in the research funding system in China and proposition for future reformation. Bulletin of National Natural Science Foundation of China, 2011, 25(1):26-29. (in Chinese)

19 付强. 高校科研项目经费管理问题与对策. 教育财会研究, 2013, 24(4):47-49.

Fu Q. Problems and Countermeasures of fund management of scientific research projects in Colleges and Universities. Studies of Finance and Accounting in Education, 2013, 24(4):47-49. (in Chinese)

20 肖小溪, 刘文斌, 徐芳, 等. "融合式研究"的新范式及其评估框架研究. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(12):2215-2222.

Xiao X X, Liu W B, Xu F, et al. Studies on new paradigm of "convergence research" and its evaluation framework. Studies in Science of Science, 2018, 36(12):2215-2222. (in Chinese)

Recommended Citation

XU, Fang and LI, Xiaoxuan (2022) "Review on Reform of Research Evaluation in Past Decade," Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Chinese Version): Vol. 37 : Iss. 5 , Article 5.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.20220418001
Available at: https://bulletinofcas.researchcommons.org/journal/vol37/iss5/5