Current quantitative scientific research evaluation overlooks the guiding role of its outcome for improving the scientific research quality. It might exert negative effects on the innovation activities of science and technology. The objectives of the study are to propose the thinking method and applied strategies of scientific research quality evaluation with the combination of assessment and improvement. By using Causal Analysis (CA), components of scientific research quality and their relationships were analyzed. And then,in terms of relevant research findings in the field of quality evaluation, scientific research evaluation, and quality improvement, the basic principle of Scientific Research Evaluation to Support Quality Improvement (SRESQI), including the connotations, targets, norms, ideas, and working process, is put forward. Moreover, several obstacles and their corresponding suggestions for applying the theoretical achievement of SRESQI in Chinese universities and research institutions according to their status quo are discussed. The achievement might compensate for the limitations of conformity assessments and quality awards in this field, and provide Chinese universities and research institutions with a new approach to improve on scientific research quality.
Key words
scientific research quality /
quality evaluation /
quality improvement
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] 科学技术部发展计划司.中国R&D经费支出特征及国际比较.科技统计报告,2009(6).
[2] 邹承鲁,王志珍. 质量比数量更重要-科学研究成果质与量的辩证关系. 光明日报-院士论坛,2004-7-9.
[3] Zhou Wenyong, You jianxin, Wang Yuxin. Scientific Research Evaluation System for Quality Improvement of Universities’Research Institution[J]. Advances in Management of Technology:Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Technology 2007, Aussino Academic Publishing House, 386-393.
[4] Aldo Geuna, Dudi Hidayat & Ben Martin. Resource Allocation and Research Performance:The Assessment of Research. Higher Education Funding Council of England, Brighton, 1999-7-30.
[5] Research Assessment Exercise RAE 2001/RAE 2008. http://www.hero.ac.uk/uk/research/research_assessment _exercise.
[6] Eugene Garfield. The Uses and Limitations of Citation Data as Science Indictors:an Overview for Students and Nonspecialists[J]. Current Conrenrs,1992 (23):5-13.
[7] 潘际銮. 以SCI论成败:学术界一个严重误导. 中国教育报, 2005-3-25.
[8] Michael J. Larkin. Pressure to publish stifles young talent[J]. Nature, 1999, 397(6719):467.
[9] 卓德保,徐济超. 面向过程改进的诊断性质量评价[M]. 北京:机械工业出版社,2005.
[10] Col. P.I. Shilyayev. Assessing Quality Scientific-Technical Products. Database:Academic Search Premier, Military Thought, 2000, 19.
[11] 卞文华,曹德仁,张怀琼. 科研过程质量评估初探[J].中国高等医学教育, 2003(3):31-32.
[12] Jüri Allik. The quality of science in Estonia Latvia, and Lithuania after the first Decade of Independence[J]. TRAMES, 2003,7(57/52):1, 40-52.
[13] 周文泳,尤建新,陈守明. 论科学研究过程的质量改进[J]. 科学学研究, 2006(4):492-496.
[14] Nishizawa, Masaki; Negishi, Masamitsu; Shibayama, Morio; Sun, Yuan; Nomura, Hiroyasu; Maeda, Masafumi; Mitsuda, Yoshitaka. Evaluation of Japanese universities’research activity based on the number of awards of Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research from 1998 to 2002 and in 2003[J]. Progress in Informatics, 2007(4):79-101.
[15] 刘作义,陈晓田. 科学研究评价的性质、作用、方法及程序[J]. 科研管理,2002(2):33-40.
[16] 周文泳,裘文进. 论高校研究机构科学研究的质量管理与质量改进[J]. 科技与经济, 2008(4):3-6.
[17] 曾天山. 教育科研评价体系现状与改进思路[J]. 中国教育学刊, 2009(9):82-86.
[18] 周文泳,张婧. 以顾客价值为导向的科研成果质量评价[J]. 中国软科学, 2010增刊(下):287-295.
PDF(1371 KB)
