英国科研卓越框架(2021)改革及对我国高校科研评估的启示
UK Research Excellence Framework (2021) Reform and Implications for China’s Implications for Research Assessment in Higher Education
DOI: 10.12677/ces.2024.124197, PDF,   
作者: 陈 轩:郑州大学教育学院,河南 郑州
关键词: 英国科研卓越框架科研评估UK Research Excellence Framework Research Assessment
摘要: 英国于2021年进行了第二轮“科研卓越框架”的评估活动,文章分析了REF2021的改革创新之处:在评估组织上,整合学科划分、缩减评估单元,设立“跨学科研究咨询小组”,完善参评学者管理制度;在评估指标上,提高科研影响力的评估权重,扩大科研影响力的涵盖范围;在评估方法上,完善同行评议结合文献计量的评估方法。并在中英高校科研评估异同之处的基础上,提出了对我国高校科研评估工作的启示,包括促进跨学科研究发展,保障科研人员可持续发展,重视科研的非学术影响,注重定量数据对同行评议的支持。
Abstract: This paper analyzes the reforms and innovations of REF2021, which is the second round of the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF2021) assessment in 2021: In terms of assessment organization, integrating disciplinary divisions, reducing the number of assessment units, setting up an “Interdisciplinary Research Advisory Group”, and improving the management system for participating scholars; In terms of assessment indicators, increasing the assessment weighting of research impact and expanding the coverage of research impact; and in terms of assessment methods, improving the assessment methods of peer review and bibliometrics. This paper analyzes the reforms and innovations of REF2021: In terms of assessment organization, integrating disciplinary division, reducing assessment units, establishing “Interdisciplinary Research Advisory Group”, and improving the management system of participating scholars; In terms of assessment indexes, increasing the weighting of the assessment of scientific research impact, and expanding the scope of scientific research impact; And in terms of assessment methodology, perfecting the assessment method of peer review and bibliometrics. Based on the similarities and differences in the assessment of research in Chinese and British universities, we also put forward the inspiration for the assessment of research in Chinese universities, including promoting the development of interdisciplinary research, guaranteeing the sustainable development of researchers, paying attention to the non-academic impact of scientific research, and focusing on the support of quantitative data for peer review.
文章引用:陈轩. 英国科研卓越框架(2021)改革及对我国高校科研评估的启示[J]. 创新教育研究, 2024, 12(4): 183-190. https://doi.org/10.12677/ces.2024.124197

参考文献

[1] 安宁, 邓开喜, 莫雷. 高校科研评价体系构建的探讨——以华南师范大学科研业绩评价体系构建为例[J]. 华南师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2008(3): 131-138.
[2] 教育部科技部印发《关于规范高等学校SCI论文相关指标使用树立正确评价导向的若干意见》的通知[J]. 中华人民共和国教育部公报, 2020(3): 24-26.
[3] 李漫红. 英国大学科研评估制度变迁研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 沈阳: 东北大学, 2016.
[4] 王红军, 康小明. 英国大学科研绩效评估体系的变迁及其启示[J]. 国家教育行政学院学报, 2018(12): 84-90.
[5] 李漫红. 英国大学科研评估的改革及其借鉴意义[J]. 东北大学学报(社会科学版), 2013, 15(1): 91-95.
[6] HEFCF (2019) Panel Criteria and Working Methods.
https://2021.ref.ac.uk/publications-and-reports/panel-criteria-and-working-methods-201902/index.html
[7] 王楠, 张莎. 构建以跨学科和社会影响为导向的科研评估框架——基于英国“科研卓越框架”的分析[J]. 中国高教研究, 2021(8): 71-77.
[8] 汪君, 周群英. 卓越、公平、多元: 英国科研卓越框架(REF)改革的新动向及启示[J]. 应用型高等教育研究, 2021, 6(2): 67-72.
[9] HEFCF (2019) REF2021 Interdisciplinary Research Advisory Panel: Review of the Criteria-Setting Phase.
https://2021.ref.ac.uk/media/1901/idap-final-report-designed-final.pdf
[10] HEFCF (2019) Guidance on submissions of REF2021.
https://2021.ref.ac.uk/guidance-and-criteria-on-submissions/index.html
[11] 李胜会, 陈霄. 浅析英国卓越科研评估框架[N]. 中国社会科学报, 2021-03-15(007).
[12] HEFCF (2019) Assessment Framework and Guidance on Submissions.
https://2014.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/assessmentframeworkandguidanceonsubmissions/GOS including addendum.pdf
[13] 茹宁. 英国科研社会影响评估改革与启示——基于科研卓越框架(REF)的研究[J]. 世界高等教育, 2021, 2(1): 30-45.
[14] 李锋亮, 黄倩殷. 英国科研评估制度变化动向及其启示[J]. 学位与研究生教育, 2015(1): 74-77.
[15] HEFCF (2019) Assessment Systems Panel User Group.
https://2021.ref.ac.uk/panels/assessment-systems-panel-user-group/index.html
[16] HEFCF (2019) Citation Data Panel User Group.
https://archive.ref.ac.uk/panels/citation-data-panel-user-group/index.html
[17] 国务院关于印发“十三五”国家科技创新规划的通知[J]. 中华人民共和国国务院公报, 2016(24): 6-53.
[18] 王中向. 英国REF评估框架研究[J]. 高教探索, 2013(4): 66-69 85.
[19] 李辉, 赵嘉仁. 我国高校科技评价的问题及对策研究[J]. 中国集体经济, 2017(23): 109-110.
[20] Lindblom, C. (1959) The Science of Muddling Through. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
[21] Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., et al. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage, London, 4-6.
[22] 邢欢. 社会科学研究: 非学术影响及其评估[J]. 清华大学教育研究, 2017, 38(2): 66-74.
[23] 樊秀娣, 石雪怡. 英国“科研卓越框架”同行评议制度的改革及启示[J]. 江苏高教, 2020(9): 24-31.
[24] 阎光才. 谨慎看待高等教育领域中各种评价[J]. 清华大学教育研究, 2019, 40(1): 1-4.