|
| 对“学科评估”的若干思考 |
| Further Thinking on “Discipline Assessment” |
| 投稿时间：2019-05-05 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 学科评估;名称;内涵;指标体系 |
| 英文关键词: discipline evaluation;name;connotation;indicator system |
| 基金项目:中国学位与研究生教育学会课题"基于省级统筹的研究生教育结构调整问题研究"（B-2017Y0104-004） |
| 作者 | 单位 | | 梁传杰 | 武汉理工大学 法学与人文社会学院, 武汉 430070 |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2429 |
| 全文下载次数: 3609 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 当前我国学科评估存在"学科评估"名称乱用、概念内涵不清、指标体系混乱、评估方法不当等突出问题，迫切需要在学理上予以厘清。"学科评估"按政府、第三方社会机构和高校三类实施主体，在名称上分别对应于学位点合格评估、学科水平评估和学位点自我评估；三类"学科评估"在内涵上有其内涵外延与特征；现行三类评估在指标体系的整体设计及具体指标体系内容上需要调整和完善。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| At present, there are some prominent problems in "discipline assessment" in China,such as misuse of "discipline assessment", unclearly defined concept, ununiform indicator systems, and improper assessment approaches, which need to be clarified urgently in theory. Corresponding to the three executors, namely, government, third-party social institution, and university, the discipline assessments carried out should be named as degree program qualification assessment, discipline level assessment, and degree program carrier's self-assessment. As the three types of discipline assessments have their own denotation and characteristics of connotation, the author suggests that the overall design and the specific content of the indicator system need to be adjusted and improved. |
|
查看HTML全文
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
