During the two sessions of this year, the trend of erroneous scientific evaluation of SCI (including liberal arts C and core journals) was eliminated, and continued to receive attention and hot discussion. The author believes that this discussion should be deepened from “whether it should be broken” to “how to break it”, and put forward operational solutions to specific problems. The most important thing is to improve the research subdivision evaluation ability of the scientific research management department, that is, to use complex thinking, and select and apply appropriate evaluation standards and methods according to different evaluation objects and purposes.
Paper evaluation is undoubtedly one of the most important evaluation methods, but it has its scope of application. Some scientific research work focuses on actual results, and the results appear in fields, factories and mine workshops, or appear as cultural and artistic products. It may refer to and condense many paper results, but it cannot and does not need to be expressed in papers.
There is still a need to “subdivide” in the field of appraisal of applicable papers. In addition to fully considering the characteristics of different disciplines, it should also be noted that there is a big difference between basic research and innovative research. Innovative research is often born in the interdisciplinary zone, and most academic journals are established according to the current disciplinary system, which is easy to cause the publication of interdisciplinary research papers. Subject experts “consultation”.
In particular, it is necessary to distinguish between the evaluation of the comprehensive ability of scientific researchers and the evaluation of the ability to undertake a certain subject. Some colleges and universities only ask whether the publication of the thesis is “core” and do not ask the content of the article. Other colleges and universities require the publication of a paper of a specific major and only “calculate” when evaluating scientific research. The former is either a lazy administration of scientific research management, or a helpless way of coping with various assessments and rankings; the latter limits scholars ’research interest and stifles the burst of thought sparks. In fact, sophisticated research results often depend on Yu has a broad interest in the brain. If a scholar of geology major published a paper in a core literary journal based on his true ability, it just means that the scholar has a good degree in both arts and sciences and has a comprehensive education. However, if he applies for geological research projects based on a number of literary papers, he will need to consider carefully, discuss each question one by one, and reasonably determine whether the applicant has the academic reserves and ability to complete the project.
Scientific research evaluation has a strong guiding force. Only by subdividing the evaluation, guidance can be accurate, and the achievements and talents can be truly judged. This requires the scientific research management department to treat evaluation as a science and respect the laws of scientific research. Those who engage in scientific research evaluation are not necessarily all-round experts, but they should become “gourmets” who are good at tasting. In this way, researchers can work with peace of mind, show results, realize life ambitions, and contribute to the national society.
(the original title is to break the” SCI supreme “key is to improve the scientific research evaluation ability)