研究生教育质量评估研究综述：理论演进、主体关系与实践进展

A Review of Research on Graduate Education Quality Assessment: Theoretical Evolution, Stakeholder Relations and Practical Progress

摘要: 研究生教育质量评估是研究生教育治理的关键环节，也是高层次人才培养质量保障的制度基础。本文检索中外主要数据库，围绕理论基础、评价主体、指标体系、方法工具与国际比较五个维度，系统梳理该领域研究的理论演进与前沿议题。研究发现：质量观已由学术导向与市场导向的分割走向共同利益视角的整合重构，评价范式由投入–产出转向学习者发展；评价主体走向多元共治，但学生主体仍显缺位；在纠正单一量化指标导向的政策背景下，指标体系正走向综合化与多元化。本文认为，已有研究在理论框架与方法工具上贡献显著，但在学生主体视角、指标本土化与跨学科适用性方面仍存不足，其深层根源在于现代大学治理的科层制逻辑、学术共同体的专业逻辑与人才培养的个性化逻辑之间的结构性变化。未来研究应聚焦数智技术与评价的深度融合、共同利益视角下的理论建构与增值评价的深化。

Abstract: Graduate education quality assessment is a key link in graduate education governance and an institutional foundation for quality assurance in high-level talent cultivation. Drawing on major Chinese and international databases, this paper systematically reviews the theoretical evolution and frontier issues of the field along five dimensions: theoretical foundations, evaluation stakeholders, indicator systems, methods and tools, and international comparison. The review finds that conceptions of quality have moved from the divergence between the academic orientation and the market orientation toward an integrated reconstruction from the perspective of the common good, and that the evaluation paradigm has shifted from input-output to learner development. Evaluation stakeholders have moved toward multi-stakeholder co-governance, yet students remain underrepresented. Against the policy background of correcting a single quantified-indicator orientation, indicator systems are becoming more comprehensive and diversified. The paper argues that although existing research has contributed significantly in theoretical frameworks and methodological tools, gaps remain in the student perspective, the localization of indicators and interdisciplinary applicability; these gaps are rooted in the structural tension among the bureaucratic logic of modern university governance, the professional logic of the academic community and the individualized logic of talent cultivation. Future research should focus on the deep integration of digital-intelligent technologies and evaluation, theoretical construction from the common-good perspective, and the advancement of value-added evaluation.