Sad: become academic communication field academic awards

Academic awards to alienation, not the awards, but critics; not a prominent academic, but to become social, to become a public relations act. Academic Awards become academic communication field, scholars turn into "beats" and "socialite."



Academic awards as a good means to get rich, awards are sponsorship, fame and fortune by critics to form a chain of interest. Serious academic awards addicted mercenary air, into fame and wealth of business practices.



Some of the judges as both judge and also as athletes. Excessive awards, evaluation Black Award, academic awards as inbreeding and "do not give awards to avoid the pro-" academic Vanity Fair.



Academic awards, academic research is a very important thing the course. Real academic award is sacred, full of honor and responsibility. Awards are upright, 1 Bing Zhigong; winners deserved, I feel honored; comer that high standard, yearn. Can be said that serious and fair academic awards for promoting academic prosperity, deepening theoretical research, carry forward the fine style of study play an important role.



Currently, a variety of academic awards academics have sprung up, and scholars are often faced with a variety of awards. One, there are many science fair awards, recognized by scholars; but undeniable, impulsive and unhealthy practices are being quietly eroded the academic side of the Pure Land Awards.



Some scholars reflected the academic awards have now evolved into some of the academic free market, the form of similar, quite a mixed bag, awards specialized households, interest groups and the unspoken rules of the prevalence of academic awards completely deviated from the subject itself. Reporter conducted in-depth interviews on this topic.



Mixed academic awards



Reporter found that some major awards in national reputation among scholars, is still very good. Such as the Ministry of Education "Humanities and Social Sciences Award," literary "Mao Dun", the economics profession, "Sun Yefang Economics Prize", "Zhang Peigang Award", "Jiang Yiwei Fund Award", humanities and social sciences sector, "Wu Yuzhang Award" and so on. These awards are on the subject of development and prosperity has played a positive role.



Had long served as "Sun Yefang Economics Prize," the Secretary-General of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences researcher Zhang Zhuoyuan Economic Research Institute, told reporters about the award review process. He said that generally there are about 100 books each, 150-200 papers for awards, the awards cycle lasted 3-4 months. Awards are two ways to apply: First, their application and the expert recommendations; second is to ask the important publications, publishing houses and newspapers recommendation. Primary members recommended by the Institute of Economics, a research fellow in all, Beijing University, People's Congress, Fudan University, Xiamen University, Nankai a professor from each of the composition of selection had concentrated in the Guest House closed. Now take the form of meetings, mainly to do more preparatory work. He also stressed that some books and articles relevant experts as less primary group, but also another expert to assess and comment.



Zhang Zhuoyuan that in order to try to be objective, fair and withstand the scrutiny, awards Ningquewulan, monographs and articles to create a more consistent view of when the recommendation to the Awards Committee, or expert to see continuously. Even so, the awards process are still people trying to influence through various awards results. Zhang Zhuoyuan always be honest with myself encountered such a case, if people say that as long as you can not comment on the prize money, or even donate money. "'Sun Yefang Economics Prize' is serious, do not charge a penny for awards must only give awards to meet the standards, Song Renqing is absolutely impossible."



At the same time, journalists have also heard that more than an academic issue to some feelings of academic awards. They mouth several academic awards of misconduct can be roughly summarized as the following three aspects.



One academic awards to alienation, not awards, but critics; not prominent academic, but to become social, to become a public relations act. Academic Awards become academic communication field, scholars turn into "beats" and "socialite."



Second, academic awards as a good means to get rich, awards are sponsorship, fame and fortune by critics to form a chain of interest. Serious academic awards addicted mercenary air, into fame and wealth of business practices.



Third, some judges as both judge and also as athletes. Excessive awards, evaluation Black Award, academic awards as inbreeding and "do not give awards to avoid the pro-" academic Vanity Fair.



Particularly complex human factors



Awards is an objective act itself, why become a breeding ground of academic corruption and unethical behavior of bacteria a great promoter?



Some experts argued that the assessment, which is closely related to the whole society, and to declare excessive, many books, bad operation awards criteria. Shen Ping who questioned the results can not be unfair to impute to the awards process and systems. Process right does not mean the result is true, really good program can not guarantee the result is true, but it can ensure that the mistake be corrected. In addition, the Who to oversee the assessment of experts?



Each side has proved long as the jury awards a variety of Social Sciences, Jilin University Professor Norm Shift of the words, "awards themselves are particularly complex and difficult. First of all, compared with the awards program, is a kind of achievement awards assessment, both relatively good operational side, but also have their bad side of the operation. easy to operate because it is not the existence of a thing is not expected to conduct the assessment, but the things that have been formed to review, from In this sense, it has a definite object. Second, precisely because it is what has been formed, the heavy workload brought reviewers gave many difficulties. "



When a reporter calls to connect Hong Kong Baptist University, China Institute of Contemporary Victor Sit, he said, "few scholars to participate in the Mainland of Hong Kong awards accreditation, because the more personal relationships suffer, SCI and SSCI on the mainland scholars have different views."



Capital Normal University Professor Ye Xianming have very mixed feelings. He told reporters that the academic awards of academic misconduct should be drawn much more interest in the academic community. Many scholars believe that this is widespread, but in the end serious harm and to what extent, general scholars only from an abstract point of view, it is difficult to understand specifically. Shen Ping only when their own perceptions can prove prior knowledge of the abstract. 2010, he was Shen Ping city awards outstanding achievements of philosophy and social science, his book "the" knowledge economy "critical" Although the parties have been positive, but the awards suffered a "reverse out", and related agencies have not given any reasonable interpretation and argument.



Ye Xianming that China scholars in the academic misconduct, including other areas of academic corruption, are often among the procedures took place, why not check out or good check because it is consistent with procedures, which needs to further improve the assessment system.



Experts have pointed out, unlike the Natural outcome of Humanities and Social Sciences as immediate, the results of well defined and more prone to the phenomenon of some unjust awards. In addition, some rules for the operation of the space was so often have problems, most of the awards is not over yet, some people know the inside story, know who is winning.



Academic Awards and more young scholars for the stability



Schools keen awards, academics keen award, the community keen to do prize the deeper reason?



Research Associate, Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Literature in the small flag that awards more affordable is the title of the main issues, many units will be assessed with the award-winning titles directly linked; the same time, cash prizes are very attractive. In addition, winning the prize brought honor and recognition to my academic, are an important reason for hot awards.



The difference is that with the Mainland, Hong Kong's senior professors can not even win a prize who were indifferent. Introduction Victor Sit, Hong Kong's eight major universities do not own assessment system, the standard practice is to the West, to see scholars in SCI, SSCI of articles in several, impact factor, whereas winning the prize are not tied with the commentary titles. In addition, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong University with the "Outstanding Research Award" and "Outstanding Young Research Award" was to have just entered the doctoral and postdoctoral studies internal assessment is usually not to the most accomplished people, but rather becomes a comfort means. For example the department of the young professor, the contract to expire, they hope to continue the work he left behind, then we should as he left to create conditions for the award, after all, the scholars Di Wei Gang Chu Lai is not stable, depends on a number of awards to Zhicheng.



So, whether in Hong Kong SCI and SSCI academic evaluation system satisfactory? "Complain too much," so the phone SIT said. Turning to the reasons, his analysis, by the Western English-based criteria, where there are objective, there are not objective, scientific factors. For example, Japan, France, Germany, paper is very important to the magazine Zai Zi Ji, published in their own language, but in these two systems Shangbuyiding Tixian out, China Neidiyixie good article Yezaijitong li Fan Ying disagree. In addition, SCI, SSCI journal articles only, not including monographs, and monographs no specific measure. Comment title, academicians and other mainly by these two indicators, if monographs, depends on individual circumstances, if it is more famous European and American publishers will be taken seriously, for example, works published by Oxford University Press, the equivalent of SCI's 8 article.



SIT also pointed out that, SCI and SSCI article, the total difference of 3000 percent, the article quoted the former 30 times the number of the latter, if natural science articles cited 30 times, in fact, the importance of social science articles cited is equal to 1 . SCI shorter articles, often written with a lot of people, space is small; social sciences are often dozens of pages, and a person to write, each lasting up to 34, a recognized academic journal of natural science can be made up to a 20 article. Therefore, there should be between the rate of conversion.



Academic vision and academic experts have conscience



Any system can not perfect, but it should be to seek perfection. Awards for academic problems exposed, the experts on their constructive comments.



On the evaluation mechanism, experts generally believe that some quantitative indicators should become a comprehensive appraisal. Norm Shift proposal should adhere to classification review, expert review, public review and reconsideration review combined in four ways. Category assessment also includes tiered assessment, that is the basic theory and applied research to different requirements, basic research requirements should be deep, some gain on the subject construction; application of research results required to be real, to be operational. In addition, awards are not afraid of abuse assessment, but rather fear landmark award assessment is broken, the average award would not contribute significantly. At the same time, it should be from a realistic point of view, more concerned about winning the assessment, a significant impact on the academic community, with academic-oriented assessment of the award, to be very strict treatment.



Reporter found that all interviewed placed particular emphasis on the academic standards of evaluation experts and academic conscience. Norm Shift of that evaluation experts should be a recognized academic community where we can, and have deep academic foundation, a thorough grasp on the academic front leading experts. "He also has academic vision and academic conscience, an academic who lack vision, his scholarly conscience will weaken, because he did not respect themselves; only have an academic vision, the people, will pay more attention to their academic conscience, afraid of dyeing His black feathers. "



Ye Xianming is recommended to establish a scientific and strict avoidance system accountability. Reporting awards for each person can avoid the bodies 5-10 people, in order to avoid a good work destroyed in a different academic views, and even personality differences. If the identification results overturned the original views on related subjects panel of judges, we should restore the reputation, while the relevant provisions of the original judges can no longer act as judges. At present, the academic right to jury duty are not unified, the judges should establish a reward and punishment mechanism.



D flag is raised, to establish academic awards after the type of compensation system on the real work can stand the test of time additional award. Also, can not let the "academic star" when the judge, jury awards are responsible should be able to sit down and down-to "players" look at things, rather than holding utilitarian and selfish purposes. Of course, as the awards were, themselves have peace of mind, should have a correct understanding of the rewards.



Road is long Come, perhaps, improve our system of academic evaluation system and the awards have a long way to go, but with a conscience and social responsibility of scholars encouraged to go well at every step, all related to academic awards authority, about the dignity of the Chinese academic.