基于ESI和InCites的新兴世界一流大学学科发展分析——以UM和KAIST为例
|
摘要
世界一流学科建设是建成世界一流大学的核心与前提,对高校实现内涵式与跨越式发展意义重大。通过定量研究方法,对选取的新兴世界一流大学案例进行深入分析,围绕ESI和InCites数据库中两所学校的学科发展现状与学科发展趋势相关数据,探讨新兴世界一流大学学科发展特点,总结建设世界一流学科和世界一流大学的宝贵经验。研究结果显示,两所大学的学科结构呈现优势学科凸出、基础应用并举和理工社科协调发展的特征,而在学科竞争力方面则各有所长,均衡发展。因此,我国高校在建设一流学科时可从学科布局和学科竞争力两个方面入手,既要遵循学科发展逻辑,充分发挥学科布局对学科发展的影响作用,也要提升学科生产、学科影响、学科创新和学科发展这4个维度的能力,重视高水平论文的数量、被引率和论文发表增速,在注重院校国际化的同时更要立足本土发展。
The construction of world-class disciplines is the core and premise of building a world-class university,and it is of great significance for the realization of connotative and leap-forward development in the colleges and universities. Using the quantitative research methods,an in-depth analysis was made on the selected emerging world-class university research cases,and the development of emerging world-class universities was discussed based on the data on the development status and trends of the two schools in the ESI and InCites databases,and the precious experiences of the world-class universities and disciplines were summarized. The results show that the structure of the disciplines of the two emerging world-class universities is characterized by the advantages of the disciplines,the basic application and the coordinated development of the science and technology society.The discipline competitiveness has its own strengths and balanced development. Therefore,in building the first-class disciplines,universities in China should start from two aspects: discipline layout and discipline competitiveness. The logic of discipline development has to be followed and the influence of discipline layout on the development of disciplines should be given the full play,enhancing the four dimensions of discipline production,the impact,innovation and development,and attaching importance to the publication of high-level papers,citation rate and growth rate of paper publication. While paying attention to the internationalization of colleges and universities,the importance of local scientific research culture cannot be ignored,the colleges and universities should also be based on local developnent.
The construction of world-class disciplines is the core and premise of building a world-class university,and it is of great significance for the realization of connotative and leap-forward development in the colleges and universities. Using the quantitative research methods,an in-depth analysis was made on the selected emerging world-class university research cases,and the development of emerging world-class universities was discussed based on the data on the development status and trends of the two schools in the ESI and InCites databases,and the precious experiences of the world-class universities and disciplines were summarized. The results show that the structure of the disciplines of the two emerging world-class universities is characterized by the advantages of the disciplines,the basic application and the coordinated development of the science and technology society.The discipline competitiveness has its own strengths and balanced development. Therefore,in building the first-class disciplines,universities in China should start from two aspects: discipline layout and discipline competitiveness. The logic of discipline development has to be followed and the influence of discipline layout on the development of disciplines should be given the full play,enhancing the four dimensions of discipline production,the impact,innovation and development,and attaching importance to the publication of high-level papers,citation rate and growth rate of paper publication. While paying attention to the internationalization of colleges and universities,the importance of local scientific research culture cannot be ignored,the colleges and universities should also be based on local developnent.
引文
[1] CSAJBOK E,BERHIDI A,VASAS L,et al. Hirsch-index for countries based on Essential Science Indicators data[J]. Scientometrics,2007,73(1):91-117.
[2]武建鑫.全球顶尖年轻大学的学科布局及其战略选择——兼论后发型国家建设世界一流学科的制度空间[J].中国高教研究,2017(5):68-75.
[3]王宝玺.亚洲全球顶尖年轻大学学科布局的量化分析[J].清华大学教育研究,2017,38(6):52-58.
[4]邱均平,孙凯.基于ESI数据库的中国高校科研竞争力的计量分析[J].图书情报工作,2007(5):45-48.
[5] THELWALL M. Bibliometrics and citation analysis:from the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics[J]. Library and information science research,2009,31(4):268-269.
[6] FU H Z,CHUANG K Y,WANG M H,et al. Characteristics of research in China assessed with Essential Science Indicators[J]. Scientometrics,2011,88(3):841-862.
[7]王琳.高校图书馆基于WOS/ESI开展学科服务策略研究[J].图书情报导刊,2018,3(2):33-38.
[8] In Cites数据库(In Cites TM)[EB/OL].[2018-05-01]. http://ipscience-help. thomsonreuters. com. html.
[9] World Reputation Rankings 2018|Times Higher Education[EB/OL].[2018-07-28]. https://www. timeshighereducation. com/world-university-rankings/2018/reputation-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
[10]何显明,揭扬.“四小龙”经验与中国现代化道路[J].当代亚太,1996(2):11-16.
[11]林岚涛.中国大学“双一流”建设与世界一流大学评价指标研究[J].教育文化论坛,2017,9(2):1-15.
[12]姜华,刘苗苗,刘盛博.基于ESI数据库的我国“985工程”高校一流学科评价研究[J].现代教育管理,2017(8):24-29.
[13]俞立平,武夷山.基于成长曲线分析的学科发展差距研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2011,32(7):64-68.
[14] Founding Philosophy[EB/OL].[2018-07-25]. http://www. kaist. edu/html/en/kaist/kaist_010201. html.
[15]陈晓宇,杨海燕.新时期我国建设一流大学面临的转变[J].高等教育研究,2017,38(11):11-21.
[16]胡乐乐.论国家“双一流”建设下的大学学科布局调整[J].研究生教育研究,2016(6):1-7.
[17]陈淑云,杜慰纯,秦小燕.中美“常春藤”高校学科对比分析——基于高水平论文的计量学分析[J].图书情报工作,2011,55(8):44-48.
[2]武建鑫.全球顶尖年轻大学的学科布局及其战略选择——兼论后发型国家建设世界一流学科的制度空间[J].中国高教研究,2017(5):68-75.
[3]王宝玺.亚洲全球顶尖年轻大学学科布局的量化分析[J].清华大学教育研究,2017,38(6):52-58.
[4]邱均平,孙凯.基于ESI数据库的中国高校科研竞争力的计量分析[J].图书情报工作,2007(5):45-48.
[5] THELWALL M. Bibliometrics and citation analysis:from the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics[J]. Library and information science research,2009,31(4):268-269.
[6] FU H Z,CHUANG K Y,WANG M H,et al. Characteristics of research in China assessed with Essential Science Indicators[J]. Scientometrics,2011,88(3):841-862.
[7]王琳.高校图书馆基于WOS/ESI开展学科服务策略研究[J].图书情报导刊,2018,3(2):33-38.
[8] In Cites数据库(In Cites TM)[EB/OL].[2018-05-01]. http://ipscience-help. thomsonreuters. com. html.
[9] World Reputation Rankings 2018|Times Higher Education[EB/OL].[2018-07-28]. https://www. timeshighereducation. com/world-university-rankings/2018/reputation-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
[10]何显明,揭扬.“四小龙”经验与中国现代化道路[J].当代亚太,1996(2):11-16.
[11]林岚涛.中国大学“双一流”建设与世界一流大学评价指标研究[J].教育文化论坛,2017,9(2):1-15.
[12]姜华,刘苗苗,刘盛博.基于ESI数据库的我国“985工程”高校一流学科评价研究[J].现代教育管理,2017(8):24-29.
[13]俞立平,武夷山.基于成长曲线分析的学科发展差距研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2011,32(7):64-68.
[14] Founding Philosophy[EB/OL].[2018-07-25]. http://www. kaist. edu/html/en/kaist/kaist_010201. html.
[15]陈晓宇,杨海燕.新时期我国建设一流大学面临的转变[J].高等教育研究,2017,38(11):11-21.
[16]胡乐乐.论国家“双一流”建设下的大学学科布局调整[J].研究生教育研究,2016(6):1-7.
[17]陈淑云,杜慰纯,秦小燕.中美“常春藤”高校学科对比分析——基于高水平论文的计量学分析[J].图书情报工作,2011,55(8):44-48.