教育科研评价如何走出困局  

How Does Educational Research Assessment Get Out of the Dilemma?

作　　者：孟照海 刘贵华[2] Meng Zhaohai;Liu Guihua(National Office for Education Sciences Planning;National Institute of Education Sciences,Beijing 100088)

机构地区：[1]全国教育科学规划领导小组办公室 [2]中国教育科学研究院,北京100088

出　　处：《教育研究》2020年第10期11-22,共12页Educational Research

基　　金：中国教育科学研究院2020年度基本科研业务费专项资金部门智库项目“教育科研治理体系现代化研究”(项目编号:GYF12020002)的研究成果。

摘　　要：构建中国特色教育科学三大体系的关键在于评价体系改革。在强调技术理性和绩效评价的社会背景下,教育科研评价目的逐渐异化为对新颖、绩效和功用的追求;学术共同体因行政力量的强大和第三方评价的量化推动而逐渐被弱化;评价标准简单划一,忽视不同知识类型、研究类别和知识情境中的科研差异;评价方法片面追求量化指标的简单加总,造成"劣币驱逐良币";评价结果易受非学术因素影响,致使公信力不高。究其原因,作为评价对象的教育科研通常具有知识生成的复杂性、质量显现的滞后性和成果影响的间接性等特点。评价标准随社会政治和知识范式的变化而变化,并强调个体化和特殊性知识,同时整合了多维度的知识和研究方法。在评价制度上,存在推动创新与排斥创新、内在评价与外在评价以及技术理性与总体判断的矛盾。改进教育科研评价体系,需要实施分类评价、完善同行评价、强化综合评价、推动多元评价、健全公开评价,使评价真正发挥鉴别、诊断、规范、引导和激励作用。The reform of research assessment is the key to building the "three systems"(disciplinary,academic and discourse systems) for educational science with Chinese characteristics. Currently, owing to overemphasis on technological rationality and performance assessment,educational research assessment has alienated objectives,aiming at an improper pursuit of novelty,performance and utility;the academic community is weakened by the powerful administration and quantification-driven third-party assessment institutes;the one-size-fits-all standard for assessment neglects the research differences in the types of knowledge,research categories,and the situations of knowledge application;the methods of assessment one-sidedly rely on the quantified indicators simply counted up,resulting in Gresham’s law that "bad money drives out good";and assessment outcomes gain low public credibility owing to nonacademic factors. The reasons for this are as follows:As an object of assessment,educational research is usually characterized by complex knowledge generation,the stagnant means of displaying research quality,and the indirect influence of research outcomes;assessment standards vary with the changing social politics and knowledge paradigms,and emphasize individualized and particular knowledge,as well as multi-dimensional knowledge and methods;and in terms of the assessment system,there are contradictions between the promotion of innovations and the exclusion of innovations,between internal assessment and external assessment,and between technological rationality and holistic evaluation. To improve the research assessment system,we need to practice classified assessment,improve peer assessment,strengthen comprehensive assessment,promote diversified assessments,and consummate open assessment so that research assessment can genuinely give full play to the roles of its identification,diagnosis,regulation,direction and motivation.

关 键 词：科研评价 教育科学 质量标准 

分 类 号：G521[文化科学—教育学]