In China’s higher education, the unfairly formulated ways of evaluation underscore an urgent need for innovations in academic evaluation. The unfair ways, focusing on privileged publications and relying on a few judges, make it difficult for scholars to publish their academic achievements in privileged publications. Thus unpublished ones should be regarded as a part of their academic achievement. Peer reviewers and committee members are the only judges, who cannot guarantee fairness in their evaluation of manuscripts. But those people who expect intellectual benefit from scholars are most likely to be serious in judging the academic value of the scholars’ achievements. Therefore college students should be treated as the judges of scholars’ academic achievements. It would be a good measure to take against the process of commercialization in China’s higher education if we could uncage the issue of academic evaluation from the issue of publication. Also, it would be good for both college students and teachers if we invited college students to take part in academic evaluations.
| Published in | Education Journal (Volume 3, Issue 4) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18 |
| Page(s) | 256-260 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2014. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Innovations, Academic Evaluation, Higher Education
| [1] | Ruan, Yuan. (Ed.). (1980). Li Ji Zheng Yi (The Exegesis of the Rituals) In Shi San Jing Zhu Shu (The Notes and Commentaries of the Thirteen Classics) Volume(Π). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju (China Bookstore Press), p. 1523. |
| [2] | Gao Hongli, Li Xueqian & Wangqian. The Evaluation Index and Empirical Study of Scientific Research in Universities and Colleges 高校科研评估指标及其实证研究. Education Science, April 2011, Volume 27, Number 2, pp. 71-5. Liu Huiqing. An Index System Design for Academic Evaluation in Provincial Level Universities 地方高校科研评估指标系统设计. Science & Technology Assessment, Number 8, 2010. Chen Ling, Xiao Hui, SU Jie & Li Lin. Establishing Research Evaluation Indictors System to Improve Discipline Construction and Development 建立科研评估指示体系, 促进学科建设与发展. Chinese Hospital, May 2009, Volume 13, Number 5, pp. 66-8. |
| [3] | CSSCI 2008-2009, 2010-2011 and 2012-2013, please check the following websites respectively: http://cssci.nju.edu.cn/manage/webedit/uploadfile/2012.4.24_14.34.34_xum1tnw4.pdf http://cssci.nju.edu.cn/manage/webedit/uploadfile/2012.4.26_17.43.18_2yq5yr29.pdf http://cssci.nju.edu.cn/manage/webedit/uploadfile/2012.3.26_15.23.2_c91f92cj.pdf |
| [4] | Wang, Chuhui (Ed.). (2003). Self-Reflection and Construction China’s Higher Education in Transformation. Hehui: Hehui University of Industry Press, pp.279-289. |
| [5] | Mao, Weihua. Li, Shiyong. Zhao, Ming. Jiang, Xinhua. On the Tendency and Strategy of the Utilitarian Activities for the Scientific Research in China’s Higher Education. (2007). Science & Technology Progress and Policy, Volume 24 Number 1, pp. 172-173. |
| [6] | Marx, Karl. (1988). Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 and the Communist Manifesto, Martin Milligan (trans.), New York: Prometheus Books, p. 5. |
| [7] | Amazon, 文学理论或文学原理, please check the website: http://www.amazon.cn/ |
| [8] | To examine the published amount of “Foreign Literature Study in the 20th Century 20 世纪外国文学” in current Chinese bookmarkets, please check, http://www.amazon.cn/ and http://search.dangdang.com |
| [9] | Ji, Shuihe.(Ed.). (2009). Wenxue Lilun Daoyin. Xiangtan: Xiangtan University Press, 1st edn, pp. 127-30. |
| [10] | Wang, Xianpei & Sun, Wenxian.(Ed.). (2005). Wenxue Lilun Daoyin. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 1st edn, pp. 79-89. |
| [11] | Wang, Yuanxiang.(Ed.). (2002). Wenxue Yuanli. Guilin: Guangxi Normal University Press, 1st edn, pp. 127-30. |
| [12] | Tong, Qingbing.(Ed.). (1998). Wenxue Lilun Jiaocheng. Beijing: higher Education Press, 2nd edn, pp. 171-2. |
| [13] | Ruan, Yuan. (Ed.). (1980). Lun Yu Zhu Shu (The Notes and Commentaries of the Analects) In Shi San Jing Zhu Shu(The Notes and Commentaries of the Thirteen Classics) Volume(Π). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju ( China Bookstore Press ), p. 2518. |
| [14] | Han, Yu. (1980). Zhongguo Lidai Wenxue Zuopin Xuandu (Selected Works of Literatue in the Successive Dynasties in China), Volume 1, Compilation 2. Zhu, Dongrun. (Ed.). Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe (Shanghai Ancient Books Press), p. 298. |
| [15] | Xie, Anbang. (Ed.). (2006). The New Progress of China’s Higher Education • 2004. Shanghai: Eastern China Normal University Press, p. 17. |
| [16] | Yang, Zhiling. Lin, Bing. & Su, Weichang. (1988). Higher Education in the People’s Republic of China. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press, p. 185. |
APA Style
Zhixiong Li. (2014). Innovations in Academic Evaluation for China’s Higher Education. Education Journal, 3(4), 256-260. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18
ACS Style
Zhixiong Li. Innovations in Academic Evaluation for China’s Higher Education. Educ. J. 2014, 3(4), 256-260. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18
AMA Style
Zhixiong Li. Innovations in Academic Evaluation for China’s Higher Education. Educ J. 2014;3(4):256-260. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18,
author = {Zhixiong Li},
title = {Innovations in Academic Evaluation for China’s Higher Education},
journal = {Education Journal},
volume = {3},
number = {4},
pages = {256-260},
doi = {10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.edu.20140304.18},
abstract = {In China’s higher education, the unfairly formulated ways of evaluation underscore an urgent need for innovations in academic evaluation. The unfair ways, focusing on privileged publications and relying on a few judges, make it difficult for scholars to publish their academic achievements in privileged publications. Thus unpublished ones should be regarded as a part of their academic achievement. Peer reviewers and committee members are the only judges, who cannot guarantee fairness in their evaluation of manuscripts. But those people who expect intellectual benefit from scholars are most likely to be serious in judging the academic value of the scholars’ achievements. Therefore college students should be treated as the judges of scholars’ academic achievements. It would be a good measure to take against the process of commercialization in China’s higher education if we could uncage the issue of academic evaluation from the issue of publication. Also, it would be good for both college students and teachers if we invited college students to take part in academic evaluations.},
year = {2014}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Innovations in Academic Evaluation for China’s Higher Education AU - Zhixiong Li Y1 - 2014/08/30 PY - 2014 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18 DO - 10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18 T2 - Education Journal JF - Education Journal JO - Education Journal SP - 256 EP - 260 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2327-2619 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20140304.18 AB - In China’s higher education, the unfairly formulated ways of evaluation underscore an urgent need for innovations in academic evaluation. The unfair ways, focusing on privileged publications and relying on a few judges, make it difficult for scholars to publish their academic achievements in privileged publications. Thus unpublished ones should be regarded as a part of their academic achievement. Peer reviewers and committee members are the only judges, who cannot guarantee fairness in their evaluation of manuscripts. But those people who expect intellectual benefit from scholars are most likely to be serious in judging the academic value of the scholars’ achievements. Therefore college students should be treated as the judges of scholars’ academic achievements. It would be a good measure to take against the process of commercialization in China’s higher education if we could uncage the issue of academic evaluation from the issue of publication. Also, it would be good for both college students and teachers if we invited college students to take part in academic evaluations. VL - 3 IS - 4 ER -
Email: