Under the general trend of unified evaluation, the education sector is encouraging diversified evaluation methods. On February 20, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology jointly issued a notice on regulating the use of relevant indicators of SCI papers in higher education institutions to establish a correct evaluation orientation. The document calls for breaking the “SCI papers first” wind in the evaluation system of scientific research and higher education, and regulating the use of SCI papers-related indicators in important fields such as scientific and technological evaluation and job title evaluation.
Measures include not using THE RELEVANT INDICATORS OF SCI papers as a direct basis for job title evaluation, as well as preconditions for the recruitment of personnel.
According to the opinion, we should establish and improve the classification evaluation system. For different types of scientific research work can not be “one-size-fits-all” evaluation, for basic research, the evaluation focus is on the innovation level of the paper and scientific value, not sci paper-related indicators as a direct basis for judgment. For applied research and technological innovation, the evaluation focuses on the practical contribution to solving the key technical problems in production practice, as well as the practical effect of the new technology, new products and new processes to realize the industrialization application.
The news sparked a heated debate in the academic circles.
Several scholars in the 21st century economic report reporters believe that the weight of THE SCI paper is to avoid article-only theory, to avoid a one-size-fits-all. However, the new evaluation mechanism still needs to be established as soon as possible, so as not to encounter difficulties in practical management.
Behind the battle of SCI’s evaluation system, it reflects the difficult problem of allocating scientific research resources, but the so-called “not broken and not standing”, more importantly, is still standing.
In the future, what standards should be adopted for academic research in colleges and universities?
Top 10 Opinions for SCI
Sci (Citation Science Index), a scientific literature index system edited and published by the American Institute for Scientific Information, is widely accepted internationally. At the same time, it is also used by domestic universities as a direct basis for evaluating academic level.
At present, SCI system contains more than 3600 kinds of important scientific and technological journals involving more than 100 natural science fields. In addition, SCI-E (Science Citation Index – Expanded, Science Citation Index Extension) contains more than 6,000 journals. In Chinese academia, papers published in SCI and SCI-E journals are commonly referred to as SCI papers.
However, articles within the SCI system also have weights. SCI Journals are internationally ranked according to JCR (Journal Citation Reports, Journal Citation Report) in descending order of impact factors for the previous year for all journals of a discipline, divided into four sections. The proportion of each division is equal to 25%, divided into one district (top 25%), two (25% to 50%), three (50% to 75%) and four (75% to 100%).
All along, domestic colleges and universities generally cite the Sci division of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, divided into major disciplines (referred to as “regions”) and small categories of disciplines (referred to as “community”). Both disciplines are divided into four regions according to the three-year average influence factor descending order of the journal. It is divided into one district (top 5%), two (6% to 20%), three (21% to 50%), and four (the last 50%). Therefore, some universities and research institutions take the number of SCI papers, high influence factor papers, high cited papers as the main way of talent evaluation.
The publication of “on the regulation of the use of SCI papers related indicators to establish a correct evaluation guidance of a total of 10 opinions.”
These include accurate understanding of SCI papers and related indicators, a deep understanding of the impact of the paper “SCI-first”, the establishment of a sound classification evaluation system, the improvement of academic peer evaluation, the standardization of various evaluation activities, the improvement of discipline and school evaluation, the optimization of job titles (job positions), evaluation methods, to reverse the tendency of assessment and reward utilitarianism, Scientifically set quality standards for degree awards and set the right policy orientation.
Does this mean that in the future all kinds of judges will no longer look at SCI papers?
The head of the Science and Technology Department of the Ministry of Education said that the introduction of the opinion is to reverse the current scientific research evaluation of the SCI paper related indicators one-sided, excessive, distorted use and other phenomena, breaking the paper, not negative SCI, not against the publication of the paper.
“We encourage the publication of high-level, high-quality, innovative and service contributions, and the chinese voice in the international academic community. However, in academic evaluation, it is not possible to judge the level of innovation by the relevant indicators of SCI papers. “
In this regard, the head of a 985 college in an interview with the 21st Century Economic Report, admitted that SCI article or efforts to issue, high-quality journals or try to cast.
“Everyone’s efforts to issue SCI, it seems to be a competition for jobs, in fact, or academic resources (people, projects, funds) allocation of the problem. The rational allocation of these resources is also conducive to the progress of scientific research and improve the mentality of researchers. SCI rewards cannot be cancelled, but rewards can be optimized. “
Building a diversified evaluation mechanism
It is understood that in the evaluation system of domestic colleges and universities, the importance of SCI papers in the first and second districts of the SCI division method of the Chinese Academy of Sciences is particularly prominent. It is worth noting that most of the top journals are in a district, and college teaching posts with SCI top publications are often promoted by breaking the paper, while SCI papers must be first author or newsletter author.
Usually, most colleges and universities will be SCI papers as a mandatory requirement, in some institutions to introduce talent, published three SCI papers can be hired as lecturers, five SCI papers can be hired as associate professors, more than seven (often must have more than two areas or more SCI papers) in order to meet the scientific research requirements of positive professors. At the same time, a one-zone SCI paper can be credited to several two-zone SCI papers.
Another important evaluation criterion is the IF (Impact Factor, Impact Factor) published in SCI journals, where common SCI journals range from 1 to 5, and a few top journals can reach more than 30.
However, due to different degrees of attention, some disciplines are more difficult to publish high-impact factor journals, such as tribology, traditional mechanics and so on. And other parts of the disciplines such as chemical materials, nanotechnology, biomedical and other journals with many high impact factors, the unified SCI paper quantitative standards, for such disciplines have obvious advantages.
21st century economic reporters learned that with overseas study experience and scientific research work experience of the returning scholars, in the number of SCI papers and influence factors are also more prominent, they through the sci paper quantitative standards, impact on the local university teaching posts, pay and even some in teaching, Clinical front-line struggle for many years of research staff pay several times. With SCI papers to give broken treatment, but also often cause disaffection in the academic circle.
A 985 university researchers said that for the literature history class, art architectural design class, mechanical manufacturing and other disciplines, as well as more biased in programming computer classes, it is not easy to publish articles, suggested the development of a special evaluation system. In addition, it is suggested to further promote the data sharing reward system, build a cloud platform for data collection and sharing, and improve the efficiency of scientific research.
“If we do not take into account the differences in different fields of study, and do not respect the inherent law of innovation and development, simply take the influence factor as an indicator, it is easy to lead to the bubble of scientific research.” Because popular research directions and fields tend to produce results, and innovative results take time to accumulate. Innovative results are difficult to gain advantage if the traditional evaluation model is followed. Yang Dong, a researcher at Harvard University, told the 21st Century Economic Report that the guidance of the Ministry of Science and Technology and the Ministry of Education on SCI will be conducive to the healthy development of disciplines and innovative research outputs.
However, the SCI paper evaluation system will still be the most important means of consideration in Chinese universities before the introduction of new quantitative standards.
Zhang Wei, a special professor at Ningbo Research Institute of Zhejiang University, who is also a returning school, said in an interview with the 21st Century Economic Report that the SCI evaluation system in universities is inadequate and that evaluation of diversity is an important direction. The function of colleges and universities is teaching, scientific research and social services, teaching is the cultivation of talents, this is the first. A single SCI evaluation will make many teaching teachers with weak scientific research ability send papers, weaken the function of teaching and social services, the main function of non-research-oriented colleges and universities is teaching.
“The guidance of the Ministry of Education, to teaching-oriented teachers a certain amount of job evaluation space, can achieve a diversified evaluation. I support SCI quantitative screening because it is transparent and fair enough, but a diversified evaluation system is also necessary. “
In Zhang’s view, the evaluation system of SCI papers is generally fair and transparent. The problem is not in the SCI science and technology literature index system itself, but how to accurately understand THE SCI paper and establish a sound classification evaluation system. How to ensure that the new evaluation method is fair and just still needs the idea of innovation and change.