China News Service, February 23. According to news from the Ministry of Education website, recently, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology issued "Several Opinions on Regulating the Use of Related Indexes in SCI Papers in Colleges and Universities to Establish Correct Evaluation Guides," and put forward a clear proposal to eliminate the "SCI Supreme" Claim. The person in charge of the Science and Technology Department of the Ministry of Education pointed out when answering a reporter's question that the introduction of the document is to reverse the phenomenon of unilateral, excessive, and distorted indicators of SCI papers in the current scientific research evaluation. The paper is "SCI Supreme" and does not negate SCI. , Not to mention publishing a paper.
The full text of the Q & A is as follows:
Eliminate the "SCI First" of Higher Education Papers, Establish Correct Evaluation Orientation
——The person in charge of the Department of Science and Technology of the Ministry of Education answered reporters' questions on "Several Opinions on Regulating the Use of Related Indexes of SCI Papers in Colleges and Universities to Establish a Correct Evaluation Guide"
Recently, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology issued "Several Opinions on Regulating the Use of Related Indexes of SCI Papers in Colleges and Universities to Establish Correct Evaluation Guides". To this end, the person in charge of the Science and Technology Department of the Ministry of Education answered reporters' questions on related issues.
1. Q: Please tell us the background of the document.
Answer: First of all, it is to implement the decision-making arrangements of General Secretary Jinping and the Party Central Committee. General Secretary Xi Jinping clearly stated at the National Education Conference that it is necessary to reverse the unscientific orientation of education evaluation, resolutely overcome the stubborn diseases of score-only, progression-only, diploma-only, thesis-only, and hat-only, and fundamentally solve the problem of education evaluation baton. . At the 2018 Academician Conference of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Chinese Academy of Sciences, he emphasized that "the talent evaluation system is unreasonable, and the phenomenon of thesis, title, and education only remains serious." The General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council successively issued the "Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Project Evaluation, Talent Evaluation, and Institutional Evaluation" and "Opinions on Further Promoting the Spirit of Scientists and Strengthening the Construction of Style and Style of Study". The relevant departments made specific arrangements for the work. A special action to clear up "thesis, title, education, and awards only" was launched. Colleges and universities undertake the lofty mission of Lideshuren, and should take the lead in leading the social atmosphere, promoting advanced culture, and fostering an atmosphere of innovation. We will conscientiously implement the requirements of the central government, with the breakthrough of the paper "SCI First" as a breakthrough, a small incision and a big turn, come up with practical and hard-working tricks that are highly targeted and operable, remove the "paper-only" and establish a correct evaluation guide.
The second is to respond to the concerns and expectations of the people. In recent years, related indicators such as the number of SCI papers, number of citations, highly cited papers, impact factors, and derived ESI rankings have become academic evaluations, as well as professional title evaluation, performance evaluation, talent evaluation, subject evaluation, resource allocation, The core indicators of school rankings and other aspects have caused the phenomenon of dissimilation of SCI papers and related indicators excessively pursued in the scientific research work of colleges and universities, even with the number of published SCI papers, high impact factor papers, and high cited papers as the fundamental goals. Scientific and technological innovation has problems such as distortion of value pursuit, exaggerated learning style, and quick success and shortcomings, which are not conducive to the high-quality and connotative development of higher education, cannot meet the requirements of the new era for education reform and development, and are not conducive to the construction of a strong country in education and science and technology. There is a strong call from various circles in the society to eliminate the "SCI First" and optimize the academic ecology.
Third, there is a need to improve governance capacity and governance. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China regards the promotion of the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity as a major task to achieve the goal of "two hundred years." To serve the construction of a strong country in education and a strong country in science and technology, we must accelerate the promotion of academic governance capabilities and levels, establish and improve a scientific evaluation system, and create a conscientious research and natural innovation atmosphere for researchers. To meet the major needs of the country, and pursue the spirit of science, innovation quality and service contribution, dare to stiffen bones, strengthen original innovation, strengthen long-term accumulation and continuous research, and strive to achieve major breakthroughs.
2. Q: How to understand the role of SCI papers and related indicators? What are the problems of direct use in scientific research evaluation?
A: SCI is an index of scientific citations created by the United States. It is a classification database, just like a book classification card in a library. It uses statistical research fields, directions, and frequency of citations to check the latest literature for science and technology workers and track international academics. Provide cutting-edge, scientific research. The relevant indicators of SCI papers are directly used for scientific research evaluation, which has strong limitations. First, the essence of SCI is a document indexing system, not an evaluation system, and SCI papers cannot simply be equated with high-level papers. The second is that the number of citations of SCI papers reflects the attention of the papers, and cannot correspond to the level of innovation and substantial contributions. Highly cited papers reflect more academic research hotspots, but do not directly explain their innovation contributions. The third is that the thesis is mainly an expression of basic research results. The relevant indicators of SCI thesis cannot fully reflect the contribution of scientific and technological innovation, and are not applicable to the evaluation of technological innovation and achievement transformation.
3. Q: How to scientifically evaluate academic level?
Answer: The scientific level of scientific evaluation is a complex issue, and a comprehensive evaluation method combining qualitative and quantitative is required. The document puts forward three opinions:
The first is to establish a sound classification and evaluation system. Different types of scientific research work have different output forms. To evaluate the "one-size-fits-all" problem, we must not only look at the papers, but not at the same time. The document focuses on the different types of basic research, applied research and technological innovation, national defense research, and the transformation of achievements, and puts emphasis on classification and evaluation, as well as the different weights of the paper.
The second is to improve academic peer evaluation. Peer evaluation is a common method for scientific research evaluation. The key is to truly play the role of peer experts. In guiding the experts, they should not simply replace professional judgment with relevant indicators of SCI papers, provide professional evaluation opinions responsibly, and advocate the establishment of a system of evaluation expert reputation. .
The third is to standardize evaluation work. Regarding the evaluation work, the first thing is to reduce and vigorously reduce the "three evaluations" such as project evaluation, talent evaluation, and organization evaluation. The second is to standardize the evaluation indicators and methods, especially to listen to the opinions of science and technology management departments; the evaluation method should implement representative evaluation, streamline and optimize the application materials, and no longer need to fill in the relevant indicators of SCI papers; the evaluation process should follow the principle of peer evaluation. Appropriately group the objects to be reviewed, select the appropriate experts, and set the workload reasonably.
In specific work, universities and management departments should also give full play to subjective initiative based on opinions and explore scientific evaluation methods that are more suitable for their respective characteristics.
4. Q: What are the specific measures to regulate the use of relevant indicators of SCI papers in colleges and universities?
Answer: The document provides a negative list of SCI paper use. Including five views:
The first is to improve subject and school assessment. Reduce ranking evaluations of disciplines and schools, and adhere to classification and evaluation by area. In the evaluation, it is necessary to highlight the quality and contribution of innovation, limit the use of quantitative indicators such as the number of SCI papers, and guide social institutions to carry out scientific evaluation of universities.
The second is to optimize the evaluation method of professional titles (positions). In the evaluation of job titles (positions), it is necessary to establish a classification evaluation index system. The focus of the investigation is suitable personnel and posts. The relevant indicators of SCI papers are not used as the direct basis for the evaluation of job titles (positions), and as a prerequisite for personnel employment. .
The third is to reverse the utilitarian tendency of assessment rewards. It is not appropriate for schools to set the thesis index requirements for colleges and individuals, removing the direct link between SCI thesis-related indicators and resource allocation and performance rewards.
The fourth is the scientific setting of quality standards for degree awards. Guide schools to reasonably set quality standards for degree awards in light of subject characteristics, and it is not appropriate to use indicators such as the number of published SCI papers and impact factors as restrictive conditions for student graduation and degree awards.
The fifth is to establish the correct policy orientation. Universities and their competent departments must shoulder the responsibility of leading the construction of academic culture, have self-confidence and determination, and refrain from adopting credibility in public opinion and disseminating information such as rankings compiled with SCI paper-related indicators as the core.
5. Q: After the document is issued, does it mean that the paper will no longer be viewed in various reviews in the future?
Answer: It is important to emphasize that this understanding is wrong. The introduction of the document is to reverse the phenomenon of unilateral, excessive, and distorted indicators of SCI papers in the current scientific research evaluation. What is broken is the paper "SCI Supreme". It does not negate SCI, nor is it against publication. At the same time, thesis is a form of scientific and technological innovation achievements and an important carrier of academic exchanges. We encourage the publication of high-level, high-quality academic papers that have innovative value and reflect the contribution of services, and send a Chinese voice in the international academic community. However, in academic evaluation, we cannot simply use the relevant indicators of SCI papers to judge the level of innovation; in various evaluation activities, we must use relevant indicators reasonably, adopt a comprehensive evaluation method combining qualitative and quantitative, and guide the evaluation work to highlight the scientific spirit and innovation. Contribution to quality and service.
6. Question: In the document, some expressions are "not allowed" and some expressions are "inappropriate." What is the difference? What considerations?
A: In the process of document formulation, we have fully listened to the opinions of various parties, and have carefully studied the relevant expressions in the text. In the document, different contents are expressed in different ways. When it comes to utilitarian tendencies, the use of "may not" means that it is forbidden by order and resolutely discards existing practices. In some respects, considering that the development level of China's colleges and universities is still very different, and the characteristics and requirements of different disciplines are not the same, non-rigid requirements are adopted in order to give schools a certain degree of policy flexibility and give play to their initiative. In the course of implementation, the school shall formulate specific policies in line with its own development characteristics and subject development characteristics. For example, in Article 9 of the document, “It is not appropriate to use indicators such as the number of published SCI papers and impact factors as restrictive conditions for student graduation and degree awards”, which indicates that we are opposed to making rigid regulations at the school level, but in the process of talent training, Disciplines, mentors, and departments from the perspective of scientific research ability training and scientific practice training, it is reasonable to put forward corresponding requirements for students, and it also meets the needs of talent training.
7. Q: What are the next steps to ensure the implementation of the document?
A: From the perspective of the Ministry of Education, on the one hand, it is required that "double first-class" universities, especially those directly under the Ministry of Education, check and modify relevant system documents and "double first-class" construction plans based on several opinions. On the other hand, from the administrative department itself, relevant departments and departments directly under the Ministry of Education put forward specific implementation measures based on opinions. Other institutions of higher learning and local education administrations combine their own reality with reference to implementation. The Ministry of Education will inspect the cleanup and rectification of various units through supervision and other means. Units that have not been carefully investigated, refused to make corrections, and have serious problems must adopt methods such as interviews, notifications, and criticism, and be held accountable for leadership.