The corruption case of the Guangzhou Science and Technology and Information Technology Bureau and the case of Li Xinghua, the director of the Guangdong Provincial Department of Science and Technology, have been investigated, which have caused people to pay attention to the science and technology information system. Wang Dong, deputy mayor of Guangzhou, responded that there have been so many things in this field that they are definitely related to the system. He said that only about 40% of the national research funding is actually used for scientific research and development, and 60% are used for meetings and business trips. (Yangcheng Evening News, August 2)
At the same time, the National Natural Science Foundation of China publicly notified a group of typical cases of scientific misconduct on August 1, one of which was: Peng Guoxing from a university in Hunan and Yu Wenqiong from a university in Fujian. Their behavior was to hire people online. Fund project book. After comparison, the overall similarity of the scientific fund face project of Peng Guoxing in 2012 and Yu Wenqiong’s 2012 funded project is 97.1%, the similarity based on the project is 95.9%, the similarity of the research content is 99.3%, and the similarity of the research plan. 98.5%, the innovation similarity is 100%.
After investigation, Peng Guoxing and Yu Wenqiong both spent money to purchase applications from online “intermediary companiesâ€. (Jinghua Times, August 2) The logic of “scientific research†is particularly clear in this case: spend money to buy a project application, get a topic, and get “benefits†from the topic, including academic benefits and financial benefits. - Most of the funding for the project is not for research.
Why is this logic generated? It is because China's academic evaluation system is carried out around the subject: government departments or institutions with government backgrounds publish topics, scholars from universities and academic research institutions apply for projects, and universities and research institutions apply scholars to topics as important institutions. Academic achievements, topics (the nature of the topics and the amount of funding for the project) are important indicators for scholars to promote and assess. As a result, researchers are concerned with “problems†rather than real academic research. Academics have become “discipline academics†and professors have become “professorsâ€.
This kind of "disciplinary academic" logic has led to serious utilitarian academic research in China. On the one hand, academic research has come "from the subject and from the subject". All scholars and academic institutions attach importance to project establishment, and light research, everyone What we have seen is that China's R&D expenditures have increased in recent years. There are many topics for university professors and research institutes. However, how many influential academic studies are there? Or some people will say that China will award more than 300 national scientific and technological achievements awards every year, and every two years will add a group of academicians of the two academies. The number of scientific research papers in China is also the highest in the world, but the National Science and Technology Achievement Award and two The academician of the Academy is also a part of the logic of "disciplinary academics". This is integrated with the administrative establishment of the subject, and the number of scientific research papers does not explain anything. There is a considerable proportion of papers in China, which is a zero citation rate.
On the other hand, this has also spawned academic corruption and academic misconduct. Under the logic of “disciplinary academicsâ€, academic principles have been replaced by the principle of interest. When applying for projects, academic public relations has been carried out, and research has not been carried out after the project has been completed. The subject itself has become the honor of scholars, and since everyone does not pay attention to what kind of results have been achieved, the researchers' energy is more devoted to how to toss the funds, and even the energy for scientific research, and most of them are "packaging results." Then use the results of the packaging to apply for the subject, so "subject complex subject", among the researchers in China, the most talked about is the subject, but the real academic research is far away.
To break the "disciplinary academic" logic, we must change the administrative orientation of academic resource allocation and academic evaluation, and establish an academic community evaluation. It is worth noting that when the National Natural Science Foundation reported academic misconduct, there is a detail that the universities and institutions involved in academic misconduct are covered by “a university†or “an institutionâ€, which indicates that In the academic administrative management system, the governance of academic misconduct is also affected by the interests of the factors that are intertwined. Only by implementing the academic community evaluation, academic principles can return to the academic circle. Otherwise, it will be difficult to create a good academic research environment with more investment, which may ruin the academic atmosphere.
(This article is reproduced on the Internet. The texts and opinions expressed in this article have not been confirmed by this site, nor do they represent the position of Gaogong LED. Readers need to verify the relevant content by themselves.)
At the same time, the National Natural Science Foundation of China publicly notified a group of typical cases of scientific misconduct on August 1, one of which was: Peng Guoxing from a university in Hunan and Yu Wenqiong from a university in Fujian. Their behavior was to hire people online. Fund project book. After comparison, the overall similarity of the scientific fund face project of Peng Guoxing in 2012 and Yu Wenqiong’s 2012 funded project is 97.1%, the similarity based on the project is 95.9%, the similarity of the research content is 99.3%, and the similarity of the research plan. 98.5%, the innovation similarity is 100%.
After investigation, Peng Guoxing and Yu Wenqiong both spent money to purchase applications from online “intermediary companiesâ€. (Jinghua Times, August 2) The logic of “scientific research†is particularly clear in this case: spend money to buy a project application, get a topic, and get “benefits†from the topic, including academic benefits and financial benefits. - Most of the funding for the project is not for research.
Why is this logic generated? It is because China's academic evaluation system is carried out around the subject: government departments or institutions with government backgrounds publish topics, scholars from universities and academic research institutions apply for projects, and universities and research institutions apply scholars to topics as important institutions. Academic achievements, topics (the nature of the topics and the amount of funding for the project) are important indicators for scholars to promote and assess. As a result, researchers are concerned with “problems†rather than real academic research. Academics have become “discipline academics†and professors have become “professorsâ€.
This kind of "disciplinary academic" logic has led to serious utilitarian academic research in China. On the one hand, academic research has come "from the subject and from the subject". All scholars and academic institutions attach importance to project establishment, and light research, everyone What we have seen is that China's R&D expenditures have increased in recent years. There are many topics for university professors and research institutes. However, how many influential academic studies are there? Or some people will say that China will award more than 300 national scientific and technological achievements awards every year, and every two years will add a group of academicians of the two academies. The number of scientific research papers in China is also the highest in the world, but the National Science and Technology Achievement Award and two The academician of the Academy is also a part of the logic of "disciplinary academics". This is integrated with the administrative establishment of the subject, and the number of scientific research papers does not explain anything. There is a considerable proportion of papers in China, which is a zero citation rate.
On the other hand, this has also spawned academic corruption and academic misconduct. Under the logic of “disciplinary academicsâ€, academic principles have been replaced by the principle of interest. When applying for projects, academic public relations has been carried out, and research has not been carried out after the project has been completed. The subject itself has become the honor of scholars, and since everyone does not pay attention to what kind of results have been achieved, the researchers' energy is more devoted to how to toss the funds, and even the energy for scientific research, and most of them are "packaging results." Then use the results of the packaging to apply for the subject, so "subject complex subject", among the researchers in China, the most talked about is the subject, but the real academic research is far away.
To break the "disciplinary academic" logic, we must change the administrative orientation of academic resource allocation and academic evaluation, and establish an academic community evaluation. It is worth noting that when the National Natural Science Foundation reported academic misconduct, there is a detail that the universities and institutions involved in academic misconduct are covered by “a university†or “an institutionâ€, which indicates that In the academic administrative management system, the governance of academic misconduct is also affected by the interests of the factors that are intertwined. Only by implementing the academic community evaluation, academic principles can return to the academic circle. Otherwise, it will be difficult to create a good academic research environment with more investment, which may ruin the academic atmosphere.
(This article is reproduced on the Internet. The texts and opinions expressed in this article have not been confirmed by this site, nor do they represent the position of Gaogong LED. Readers need to verify the relevant content by themselves.)
Shanghai Janetec Electric Co., Ltd. , https://www.janetecelectric.com