evaluation
-
Run into the paper statistics, helpless. On Qimo, I saw that Dr.Tong company provided the assistance of thesis statistics, and with the guidance and assistance of the doctor's teacher, I ran smoothly to get the results. Thank Dr.Tong for his high-level service.
Mr. Lin
from: tainan
-
When a doctoral dissertation encounters multiple linear regression, it has always been a difficult point and there is nothing to do. On Google, we can see that the doctor teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company provides statistical running and statistical guidance. The information and requirements to the doctor teacher, with the help of the teacher, smoothly run out the results. Thank you for the help and guidance from the doctor of Dr.Tong statistics company.
Dr. Li
from: taoyuan
-
When I met the difficulties in the statistical analysis of the doctoral thesis questionnaire, I couldn't find a clue. Finally, I saw Dr.Tong's assistance in the statistical analysis of the thesis questionnaire on qimo.com. With the assistance of the doctor, I got the results smoothly. Thank Dr.Tong for his assistance in the statistical analysis of the thesis questionnaire, which solved my urgent problem.
Dr. Li
from: Kaohsiung
-
Previously, a local statistics company in Hong Kong was entrusted, but it failed to do a good job in medical statistics. In my anxiety, I saw the doctor teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company provide statistical running and guidance, and sent the data and requirements to the doctor teacher. With the efforts of the doctor teacher, the analysis results were successfully made. I feel that Taiwan's statistics companies are more professional and the fees are reasonable.
Dr. Li
from: hongkong
-
Thank you for the efficient and high quality service provided by the doctor teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company. Solved my urgent need.
Mr. Lin
from: yunlin
-
When I met the difficulties in the statistical analysis of the pre-test and post-test of the thesis questionnaire, I couldn't solve them all the time. On Qimo, I saw that the doctoral teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company provided the tutoring service of thesis statistics, and sent the information and requirements to the doctoral teacher. With the help and guidance of the teacher, I got the results. Thank you very much for the tutoring service of the doctoral teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company There are two difficulties.
Miss Liu
from: Kaohsiung
-
It is difficult to analyze English papers by SPSS. On Google, we can see that the doctoral teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company provides the paper statistics running and guidance, sends the data and analysis requirements to the teacher, communicates with the teacher, and runs smoothly with the teacher's guidance and help. Thank you very much for the help of the doctor teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company. The teacher is serious, responsible and powerful.
Miss Zeng
from: london
-
It's difficult to analyze Stata data in accounting papers. On Yahoo Qimo, I saw the doctor teacher of Dr.Tong statistics company provide Stata statistical running guidance. The data and requirements were sent to the doctor's teacher. Under the guidance of the doctor's teacher, the Stata code was successfully designed, and the analysis results were also run out. I would like to thank the doctor's teacher of Dr.Tong statistics for his high level guidance and assistance.
Mr. Zhang
from: taizhong
-
Educational papers have quantitative statistics, which is a bit difficult! Helpless, I saw on Yahoo Qimo that Dr. and postdoctoral teachers from Dr.Tong Statistics Company provide doctoral thesis statistics and counseling services. I sent the questionnaire and sample data to the doctor, and with the guidance and assistance of the doctor, I successfully obtained the results and graduated. I am very grateful for the professional guidance of the doctor and postdoctoral teacher from Dr.Tong Statistics Company. The technical expertise, reliable quality, and reasonable fees have saved me a lot of trouble.
Dr. Song
from: Kaohsiung
|
|
|
2021-11-09 03:39:29 | onclick: | Academic evaluation should return to people-oriented |
|
I noticed a strange phenomenon. On the poster introducing the academic reporter, you can only see various "hats" and a series of magazine names, and you can't see the academic contribution information of the reporter at all. When entering the report venue, the presenter's introduction to the reporter mostly listed the "hat" and the name of the magazine, and rarely mentioned the academic contribution of the reporter. In addition, when someone introduces a scholar to us, they often only mention the journals in which the scholar has published his papers, often without talking about his academic contributions. Why do you think this phenomenon is strange? Because I always think that academic contribution is the core label of scholars, so it is most worthy of grand introduction. The ideal introduction scene in my mind is like this: This is Mr. Einstein, who founded the theory of relativity; The two were Mr. Watson and Mr. Crick, who discovered the double helix structure of DNA; This is Mr. Tu youyou. She found that artemisinin can effectively treat malaria, and so on. Through a brief introduction, although we do not know how many papers they have published in which magazines, at least we know their academic contributions. In contrast to the introduction scene mentioned earlier, we heard a series of magazine names, but we don't know what the reporter's academic contribution is.
Then, is it because the moderator is not very clear about the academic contribution of the reporter that it is impossible to introduce? I don't think so. Because the moderator of the academic report is often the invitee of the reporter, and is generally a small peer in the research field, he should be very clear about the academic contribution of the reporter and have sufficient judgment. So, can it be that the reporter has no academic contribution to be introduced? I don't think that's the reason. Although the academic contributions of different research fields may vary, since they can be invited to make academic reports, the reporter's research findings must contribute to the research field. After excluding these two possible reasons, I guess that the moderator does not introduce the academic contribution of the reporter, but focuses on the "hat" of the reporter and the magazines that have published papers, which may be due to a "Convention", that is, emphasizing the magazines for the publication of papers and neglecting the content of papers. Through magazine ranking to rank the quality of papers, and then evaluate the academic level, and then give the corresponding "hat", this "Convention" has become a common practice of current academic evaluation. Breaking the "hat only" and "paper only" mentioned in the "five only" refers to this "Convention" (it may be more accurate if the "paper only" can be adjusted to "magazine only"). Just imagine, if the academic activities in the academic circle can not put aside the "hat" and "magazine name" and return to objective academic evaluation, it is not easy to break the "five only".
I also noticed a strange phenomenon. Many colleges and universities have this invisible rule for teacher recruitment: if they have not presided over the National Natural Science Foundation project, they will not have the qualification for teacher appointment. It is understandable that obtaining the support of national scientific research fund is an important financial guarantee to maintain the good operation of the laboratory and promote the research. It is puzzling that if a research can be smoothly promoted without applying for National Natural Science Foundation, why do you require to get a national project? Some people say that getting the National Natural Science Fund proves your high academic level and your strong competitiveness in your peers. This angle seems very reasonable, but in fact, it forgot the fundamental reason for applying for Science Fund, fell into the "only project" of breaking the "five only", and applied for projects in order to need projects. Why apply for a fund? The root cause is very simple: research is short of money and needs fund support. The research in the field of life science in which the author works is mainly based on experiments (biological information also needs experimental data for analysis). Doing experiments requires instruments, reagents, consumables and so on, which cost money. It can be seen that scientists naturally take the initiative to apply for scientific research funds in order to have money to carry out a certain research. Therefore, the applied project is the internal demand of the actual scientific research activities and has no direct correlation with the academic level.
Breaking the "five only" is, in the final analysis, a problem of academic evaluation. How to conduct academic evaluation? The author obviously does not have enough skills to give valuable suggestions. Here, the author just throws a brick to attract jade, hoping to lead to insights, break and establish, and form a scientific academic evaluation mechanism.
I remember a scholar who commented on academicians said that his academic level would not suddenly improve because he was rated as an academician. It can be seen that the academic evaluation of scholars should not only pay attention to the scholars themselves without changing with the "hat", but also adjust according to the change of professional titles. The so-called "change as well as change" means to insist on evaluating the scholars' own level rather than taking the obtained "hat" as the measurement index; Change is to formulate corresponding academic evaluation standards according to the change of professional titles. How to achieve change in invariance? I think the key is to return to the people-oriented academic evaluation principle. The people-oriented evaluation principle is the principle of full trust in scholars. It is believed that scholars have the internal motivation to realize their self-worth, that scholars will fulfill their entry commitments, and that scholars can voluntarily and consciously do their best to do a good job in teaching and scientific research.
Return to the principle of people-oriented, how to carry out academic evaluation? I'll make a childish sample here. For assistant professors / lecturers, you can focus on their academic potential. Whether young people have academic potential is mainly reflected in whether they can give their own teaching and scientific research ideas, and whether they are gradually forming their own work style. For associate professors, their academic power should be investigated. Associate professors should make teaching achievements or scientific discoveries recognized by their peers, and establish a certain academic reputation in their peers. For the outstanding power of associate professors, we can choose one of the following three dimensions to evaluate: following speed, parallel running quality and leading ability. For professors, focus on their influence. The influence here can be divided into peer influence and public influence, either or both. Peer influence mainly depends on how much academic views of professors are discussed and quoted by peers, as well as the level and frequency of meetings at which professors are invited to make academic reports; Public influence mainly depends on the degree to which the professor's research findings are recognized by the public.
Academic evaluation is not only the one-way action of universities to teachers, but also the common action of universities and teachers. My ideal relationship between universities and teachers is as follows: universities fully trust teachers, strive to improve the evaluation mechanism, make teachers have a sense of belonging and honor, and encourage teachers to give full play to their talents and contribute knowledge; Teachers wear University robes, do not forget their original intention, consciously devote themselves to teaching and scientific research, and win a reputation for themselves and the University in the academic community. In the competition for various "hats", scholars go too far and forget why they started at the beginning; In the competition of various university rankings, universities go too far and forget that they should walk out of the future. It's time to return. We might as well start with the return to people-oriented academic evaluation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|