|
|
|
| The Time and Space Transformation of Knowledge Production and the Paradigm Transformation of Evaluation Model of Scientific and Technological Achievements |
| Gao Hui |
| （Economic Research Institute，Hubei Academy of Social Sciences，Wuhan 430077，China） |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The evaluation of scientific and technological achievements has always been a difficult problem at home and abroad. As a kind of institutional arrangement, the evaluation of scientific and technological achievements often embodies the rational understanding and value judgment of the law of knowledge production and its social function. As the product of knowledge production, the evaluation of scientific and technological achievements must adhere to the law of knowledge production, and the transformation of the mode of knowledge production causes the transformation of the mode of evaluation of scientific and technological achievements. In recent years, the related research focuses on the university discipline construction or “Double first-class” university construction under the knowledge production mode transformation. This paper analyzes the trend of the evaluation and transformation of scientific and technological achievements from the comprehensive perspective of the spatiotemporal transformation of knowledge production, the aim is to provide a new visual angle for how to stick to the correct direction of scientific and technological achievements evaluation and perfect the system of scientific and technological achievements evaluation.#br#As science is advancing, there has been a significant change in the mode of production of knowledge within the scientific system. From the time dimension, the mode of knowledge production has experienced the transition from Mode I, Mode II to Mode III. The transformation of knowledge production mode, on the one hand, shows the trend of changing from discipline knowledge production to social knowledge production. From the perspective of knowledge production results, compared with discipline knowledge oriented knowledge production-Mode I and applied knowledge oriented knowledge production-Mode II , Mode III is more inclined to the orientation of social public interest. On the other hand, it shows the characteristics of coexistence of multiple knowledge production modes in synchrony, that is to say, there are not only knowledge production Mode I, but also knowledge production Mode II and Mode III, as well as several modes fused together.#br#This is because knowledge production Mode III itself emphasizes the symbiosis of different types of knowledge and knowledge paradigms, and the formation and development of the new knowledge production mode only means that the new and more competitive knowledge production mode gradually occupies a dominant position, rather than the complete extinction of the old knowledge production mode. In addition, the knowledge production modes of different knowledge production organizations may be different in the same period. Even under the same knowledge production mode, different knowledge production organizations may have different forms of manifestations.#br#From the perspective of spatial dimension, crossing organizational boundaries is the main feature of the spatial evolution of knowledge production. Knowledge production derives from the traditional academic type to the social diffusion type, its essence is that knowledge production extends outward from the spatial boundary, that is, from relatively closed and continuously deepened discipline knowledge and autonomous culture to the economic knowledge, public welfare knowledge and responsibility culture guided by social practice problems in multi-dimensional situations. Specifically, the orientation of knowledge production has changed from closed state to open state, and the space of knowledge production has expanded from the field of disciplines to the public space, knowledge production has gone from a single goal of scientific knowledge growth to a multi-purpose of increasing knowledge stock and serving national and regional development.#br#A series of external forces formed by the transformation of knowledge production in the space-time dimension have promoted the transformation of the evaluation paradigm of scientific and technological achievements. In evaluation philosophy, it is shifted from psychology-behaviorism, society-constructivism to network-ecology; in value orientation, it is transformed from the academic standard based on advanced knowledge and the application standard based on economic performance to the comprehensive standard based on social benefit; and in terms of evaluation, it is changed from internal and inter-disciplinary to super-disciplinary; in the mechanism of evaluation, the peer review led by scholars is replaced by the multi-evaluation of cooperation within and outside the university to the three-dimensional evaluation involving the stakeholders, the focus of observation has been shifted from the goal-reaching scale and the customer satisfaction to the innovation-service contribution. In terms of evaluation objects, it is required that new forms of representation of scientific and technological achievements appearing on the carrier of information and communication technology should be included in the evaluation.#br#The innovation points of this paper lies in the analysis of the remarkable characteristics of the transformation of knowledge production mode from the perspective of time and space, and puts forward that with the transformation of knowledge production in time and space dimension, the evaluation of scientific and technological achievements has also moved from Paradigm 1 and 2 to Paradigm 3. This not only deepens the understanding of knowledge production theory, but also helps to guide the practice of scientific and technological achievement evaluation.#br#
|
|
Received: 11 August 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] 吉本斯,陈洪捷,沈文钦. 知识生产的新模式——当代社会科学与研究的动力学[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2011.[2] 郭芳芳,张男星. 高深知识的生产变革与高等教育绩效评价[J]. 复旦教育论坛,2012,10(6):5-9.[3] CARAYANNIS E G,CAMPBELL D F J. "Mode 3" and "Quadruple Helix":toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem[J]. International Journal of Technology Management,2009,46(3/4):201.[4] 张继明. 知识生产模式变迁视角下大学治理模式的演进及其反思[J]. 江苏高教,2019(4):9-17.[5] 黄瑶,王铭. “三螺旋”到“四螺旋”:知识生产模式的动力机制演变[J]. 教育发展研究,2018,38(1):69-75.[6] 麦均洪,龙飘. 基于知识生产模式3的高校科技成果转化模式变革:以广东省为例[J]. 科技管理研究,2020,40(19):110-115.[7] 马廷奇,许晶艳. 知识生产模式转型与学科建设模式创新[J]. 研究生教育研究,2019(2):66-71.[8] 武学超. 知识生产范式转型及对大学学术职业的影响[J]. 科技进步与对策,2018,35(1):149-153.[9] 卓泽林. 大学知识生产范式的转向[J]. 教育学报,2016,12(2):9-17.[10] 蒋文昭,王新. 知识生产模式转型与高校科研支持体系变革[J]. 中国高校科技,2018(8):14-17.[11] 蒋文昭. 基于模式3的大学知识生产方式变革[J]. 黑龙江高教研究,2017,35(4):34-37.[12] 宗晓华,张强,占茜. 以社会贡献界定卓越科研:澳大利亚大学的社会互动与影响力评价[J]. 大学教育科学,2020,11(1):58-65.[13] 张乾友.个人知识、专业知识与社会知识：知识生产的历史叙事[J].自然辩证法通讯，2017,39（1）：100-109.[14] 田甲乐. 科学知识的公共性与科学知识生产的民主化[J]. 自然辩证法研究,2018,34(7):35-40.[15] 张应强.高等教育现代化的反思与构建[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江教育出版社，2000.[16] 陈乐. 知识生产模式转型驱动下研究型大学改革路径研究[J]. 高校教育管理,2019,13(3):10-18,60.[17] 黄巨臣. 我国高等教育研究范式转型及其突破路径[J]. 教育科学,2019,35(3):51-60.[18] 马来平.科学的社会性和自主性：以默顿科学社会学为中心[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2012.[19] 杰勒德·德兰迪.知识社会中的大学[M].黄建如，译.北京：北京大学出版社，2019.[20] 白强. 大学知识生产模式变革与学科建设创新[J].大学教育科学,2020,11(3):31-38.[21] 叶继元. 学术“全评价”分析框架与创新质量评价的难点及其对策[J]. 河南大学学报(社会科学版),2016,56(5):151-156.[22] HALL B. Beyond epistemicide: knowledge democracy and higher education[C]//International Symposium on Higher Education in the Age of Neo Liberalism and Audit Cultures.Regina:University of Regina,2015.[23] 赵涛. 论网络时代知识生产方式的变迁与演替[J]. 自然辩证法研究,2014,30(12):62-68.[24] 晏成步.大学教师学术职业转型：基于知识资本的审视[J]. 教育研究,2018,39(5) :148-153. |
|
|
|
