"Organizing scientific research" must prevent only the name!The next ten years will be the point

Author:Scientific network Time:2022.08.27

Text ｜ Fan Xiudi (Director of Tongji University Education Evaluation Research Center)

A few days ago, the Ministry of Education announced that in the next ten years, it will focus on strengthening "organizational scientific research", accelerating the establishment of national strategic technology forces, and providing strong support for the construction of important talents in the world and innovation highland and high -level technology independence and self -reliance.

In my opinion, the essence of "organizational scientific research" lies in the improvement of scientific research organizations to quickly produce the emergency and major scientific and technological innovation achievements of the state. Undoubtedly, this goal is the need for national strategy, and it is also the academic ideal and goal of all scientific researchers.

However, grass -roots researchers are still doubtful about how to carry out "organizational scientific research". From the professional perspective, one is to worry that the major research projects are concentrated in the name of "Daniel". If someone is "only famous", it is difficult to make a veritable result; Whether the "big pen" operation will be marginalized.

In the final analysis, this worry is due to everyone's fear of the development of scientific research projects in administrative power, because administrative scientific research evaluation and management are easy to lead to formalism and emergency effort.

Back to the issue of "Organizing Scientific Research", everyone hopes that the competent authorities should pay attention to both the "big projects", "big platform" and "big team" in the plan, but also follow the "personalized", "small hand pen" and "none of the none of the scientific research and innovation" of scientific research and innovation. The laws of planning "such as" plan "and other basic research and" long -term "research have full growth space.

In short, the first important meaning of carrying out "organizational research" from a global perspective is to improve the level of management, strive to provide scientific researchers with good conditions and environments of concentrated scientific research, strengthen service functions, and continuously improve the system of high -quality achievements being accurate and rapidly discovered. mechanism.

In contrast to some issues in existing scientific research activities, management departments at all levels should do the following work when carrying out "organizational scientific research".

First, the main rights of scientific research activities are given to the scientific researchers in the job.

Innovation has always been a life of nine deaths. Chinese science and technology must develop leapfrogging, and it is inseparable from the development of indignation and extraordinary performance. Therefore, in addition to organizing scientific research, "organizational scientific research" must also emphasize the scientific research subjects with unified scientific research personnel in scientific research personnel, because this is the fundamental fundamental to inspiring scientific researchers' desire for innovation, enthusiasm for work, and intelligence and wisdom of scientific researchers Institutional guarantee.

It is even more straightforward. At present, there is still a "nominal" phenomenon in scientific research projects.

The general person in charge of some high -level projects only make decisions on issues such as subcontracting and funding, and the rest is rarely asked. The project that the general person in charge is not attentive, and the person in charge of the project will generally not devote themselves, and the scientific researchers are less active and proactive. In the end, it is not surprising that students serve as the main force of scientific research.

The "nominal name" project of this person in charge is likely to cause people at all levels to intentionally or unintentionally "tapping". The larger the "hand pen", the greater the loss of the country, and the major results are unable to talk about it.

Second, the use of scientific research funds to scientific researchers with actual needs, so that scientific researchers can use necessary scientific research funds when conducting scientific research.

For a long time, my country has obtained scientific research funds in the form of project competition. This approach makes people mistakenly believe that scientific research funds are a "benefits" for project staff.

At the same time, the competent authorities generally determine the amount of project funding according to the types and levels of the project. For example, key project funds are higher than non -key project funds, and the funding of natural science projects is higher than the funding of social science projects. However, the expenses of key projects are not necessarily larger than non -key projects. Every specific project under natural science or social science category, its actual expenses are also very different.

Although this method that does not follow the actual expenditure distribution of the project has to do it, it objectively solidifies everyone's understanding of the "welfare" nature of scientific research expenses, causing everyone to benefit the project funds regardless of actual needs.

As a result, on the one hand, the cost of scientific research is incomplete, and "spending money for money" leads to the physical and mental of scientific and mental researchers, which has affected the development of scientific research. Scientific researchers are not used to "benefits", but it is not easy to spend money. Many of the problems are no longer expanded here.

On the other hand, scientific research funds cannot be obtained. Many researchers who do not apply for projects are troubled by lack of scientific research funds, and even lack confidence in future career futures.

In recent years, the state has made a small investment in scientific research funding, and scientific research funds have generally met the needs of scientific research. Departments at all levels must strictly regulate the whereabouts of scientific research funds, but also reasonably allocate the targets of scientific research funds. In the final analysis, ensure that scientific research funds are used for scientific research activities and meet the legitimate scientific research needs of more scientific researchers. In this regard, "organizational scientific research" has a lot of actions.

Third, the evaluation of scientific research results is in the hands of scientific researchers in the same field.

Scientific research activities and management issues are ultimately reflected in the evaluation of scientific research results. The high -level project of "nominal name" has done perfunctory, and it can be easily associated with several SCI papers from each subcontracting unit.

Such examples show that if the scientific evaluation of scientific research results cannot be resolved, it will be difficult to cure various academic "water mixing", academic dislocation and corruption issues.

It is natural to scientifically evaluate the results of scientific research. However, many serious scientific research results have also undergone high -standard peer expert review sessions.

Therefore, I have to point out that some domestic experts have failed to exercise independent, objective and professional "academic power" in the review activities, but instead listened to "administrative power", and even became the spokesperson of "administrative power" in disguise. In this way, not only the results of the review are difficult to ensure science, but also because the review experts are generally academic "big cows", and the cost correction costs are quite large. The peers in the evaluation of scientific research must be a true academic peer.

In the "Opinions on Deepening Project Review, Talent Evaluation, Institutional Evaluation Reform" officially issued in July 2018, emphasizing the need to refine the field of experts and research directions to better meet the requirements of project review. According to the characteristics of the project, the selection conditions of the review experts and the principles of the composition of the experts should be reasonably determined. In principle, the experts who are active on the first line of scientific research and a real understanding of this, this item should be participated in the review, fully considering its professional level and knowledge structure.

For projects that are closely combined with industrial applications, experts active on the front line of production should also be selected to participate in the review. The scientific research authorities must choose the appropriate review experts when evaluating the results to fully reflect the professional standard of "organizational scientific research".

"China Science News" (2022-08-23 Observation of the 3rd edition of the university)

Edit | Fangyuan

Capture | Guo Gang