大学教师的职称晋升与学术生产行为

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (1)

全文: PDF (910 KB) RICH HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要量化考核的聘任制是我国高等教育领域讨论的重点问题，但一直缺乏严谨的经验研究。聘任制下职称的不同会影响大学教师的学术生产行为。基于中国顶尖大学经济学专业教师数据的实证研究发现，在考核与晋升压力最大的副教授阶段，存在学术产出质量并未处于最高水平的“悖论”，大学教师高质量的学术产出主要来自减压效应及其作用机制。量化考核的聘任制扭曲了教师的学术生产行为。给大学教师提供一个宽松的学术环境，对提高大学的学术产出质量具有重要意义。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	金祥荣
	晁嵩蕾
	罗德明
	盛沛锋

关键词 ：大学教师, 量化考核体系, 学术生产, 职称晋升, 聘任制, 晋升压力

Abstract：Since the beginning of this century, there have been fierce debates in the field of Chinese higher education research over the quantity-based professional evaluation system in Chinese universities. Unfortunately there is no empirical evidence to assess either positively or negatively the performance of this reform. This paper tries to provide some empirical evidences on how academic promotion affects academic production at the individual faculty level in Chinese universities in an era of quantity-based evaluation system. We examine how an individual faculty member changes his/her academic output after the adoption of the quantity-based promotion system in his/her three sequential academic positions of lecturer, associate professor, and full professor respectively, with respect to both the quantity and the quality of research publications.We manually collect the individual career and academic output data of 114 professors of economics at 12 top universities who went through three sequential academic positions from lecturer to full professor between the years of 2003 and 2019. For each faculty we construct the quantity and quality indicators using information of the authors’ position in the research paper and the impact factor of the journal in which the paper is published. We also manually collect the eligibility information of the quantity-based promotion system in each stage of promotion from each university’s website. We construct the pressure index at the position and university level using the eligibility information of promotion. The lecturers’ (associate professors’) pressure index measures the difficulty for them to be promoted to associate professors (full professors respectively) at their university. And we let full professors pressure index be 0. We find that associate professors face the highest promotion pressure.First, for each economist the quality of academic output increases with academic positions. In the stage of associate professor, he/she faces fierce promotion pressure, while the quality of his/her academic output is not at the highest level. After he/she becomes full professor, he/she has the least promotion pressure and produces high-quality papers.Second, the economics professors exhibit no significant difference in the number of academic publications at each stage of their academic position. They always pursue the quantity of publications at each stage. Even in the stage of full professor with minimum pressure, low-quality papers still account for nearly 70% of their publications. With the promotion to the more advanced position, there exists no fundamental change in distortions. These professors of economics pursue the quantity of publication with low quality. The promotion pressure is a crucial reason to distort economists’ academic production in Chinese universities. We test this mechanism by introducing the promotion pressure index into the mediating effect model. Empirical evidences show that high-quality academic output mainly comes from the relaxation of the promotion pressure. Professors produce high-quality paper in the low-pressure environment. The environment with high promotion pressure shaped by the quantity-based evaluation system is an important reason of the short-term behavior of academic production in Chinese universities.These empirical findings exhibit very significant policy implications. It is important to relax the promotion pressure and provide a liberal academic environment for academic staff for the improvement of academic research quality in Chinese universities. For this purpose, it is necessary to introduce reforms of the quantity-based evaluation system in Chinese universities.

Key words： university teachers quantity-based evaluation system academic production promotion recruitment system promotion pressure

收稿日期: 2020-11-13

基金资助:国家自然科学基金面上项目（72073120）；教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地基金资助项目（16JJD790052）；浙江省“万人计划”（人文社科领军人才）支持计划（ZJWR0204018）；中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目“大数据、机器学习与新计量经济学及其应用研究”；中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目“基于土地资源配置视角的城乡融合发展机制研究”；浙江大学世界顶尖大学合作计划资助项目

作者简介: 1.金祥荣（https：//orcid.org/0000-0003-0561-8865），男，宁波大学商学院院长、教授，浙江大学经济学院教授、博士生导师，主要从事新制度经济学研究；；晁嵩蕾（https：//orcid.org/0000-0002-1397-3579），男，浙江大学经济学院博士研究生，主要从事大学知识生产研究；；罗德明（https：//orcid.org/0000-0002-7973-9451），男，浙江大学经济学院教授，浙江大学民营经济研究中心研究员，博士生导师，主要从事发展经济学研究；；盛沛锋（https：//orcid.org/0000-0002-2584-6243）（通信作者），男，宁波大学商学院助理研究员，主要从事国际化教育研；

引用本文:

金祥荣, 晁嵩蕾, 罗德明, 盛沛锋. 大学教师的职称晋升与学术生产行为[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2022, 52(2): 128-145. Jin Xiangrong, Chao Songlei, Luo Deming, Sheng Peifeng. Promotion and Academic Production in Chinese Universities. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2022, 52(2): 128-145.

链接本文:

https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/ 或 https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/Y2022/V52/I2/128

1 阎光才：《高校教师聘任制度改革的轨迹、问题与未来去向》，《中国高教研究》2019年第10期，第1-9页。
2 沈红、刘盛：《大学教师评价制度的物化逻辑及其二重性》，《教育研究》2016年第3期，第46-55页。
3 黄亚婷：《聘任制改革背景下我国大学教师的学术身份构建——基于两所研究型大学的个案研究》，《高等教育研究》2017年第7期，第31-38页。
4 卢威：《我国高校需要什么样的聘任制改革》，《发展教育研究》2020年第3期，第43-50页。
5 贾永堂：《大学教师考评制度对教师角色行为的影响》，《高等教育研究》2012年第12期，第57-62页。
6 王全林、程东峰：《大学教师学术生态问题与重构》，《教师教育研究》2013年第2期，第12-17页。
7 周光礼、马海泉：《教学学术能力：大学教师发展与评价的新框架》，《教育研究》2013年第8期，第37-47页。
8 陈时见、胡娜：《新时代高等学校教师学术评价的改进》，《教育研究》2020年第2期，第133-142页。
9 Iaria A.， Schwarz C. & Waldinger F.， “Frontier knowledge and scientific production： evidence from the collapse of international science，” The Quarterly Journal of Economics， Vol. 133， No. 2 （2018）， pp. 927-991.
10 Leon F. L. L. D. & McQuillin B.， “The role of conferences on the pathway to academic impact： evidence from a natural experiment，” Journal of Human Resources， Vol. 55， No. 1 （2020）， pp. 164-193.
11 Borjas G. J. & Doran K. B.， “Cognitive mobility： native responses to supply shocks in the space of idea，” Journal of Labor Economics， Vol. 33， No. S1 （2015）， pp. S109-S145.
12 Borjas G. J.， Doran K. B. & Shen Y.， “Ethnic complementarities after the opening of China： how Chinese graduate students affected the productivity of their advisors，” Journal of Human Resources， Vol. 53， No. 2 （2018）， pp. 1-31.
13 Blackburn R. T. & Lawrence J. H.， “Aging and the quality of faculty job performance，” Review of Educational Research， Vol. 56， No. 3 （1986）， pp. 265-290.
14 Levin S. G. & Stephan P. E.， “Research productivity over the life cycle： evidence for academic scientists，” American Economic Review， Vol. 81， No. 1 （1991）， pp. 114-132.
15 Xie Y. & Shauman K. A.， “Sex difference in research productivity： new evidence and an old puzzle，” American Sociological Review， Vol. 63， No. 6 （1998）， pp. 847-870.
16 Laband D. N. & Piette M. J.， “Favoritism versus search for good papers： empirical evidence regarding the behavior of journal editors，” Journal of Political Economy， Vol. 81， No. 1 （1994）， pp. 114-132.
17 Borjas G. J. & Doran K. B.， “Prizes and productivity： how wining the fields medal affects scientific output，” Journal of Human Resources， Vol. 50， No. 3 （2015）， pp. 728-758.
18 Jia R.， Nie H. & Xiao W.， “Power and publication in Chinese academia，” Journal of Comparative Economics， Vol. 47， No. 4 （2019）， pp. 792-805.
19 梁文艳、周晔馨、于洪霞：《社会资本与大学教师学术创新能力研究》，《经济研究》2019年第11期，第133-148页。
20 Morichika M. & Shibayama S.， “Impact of inbreeding on scientific productivity： a case study of a Japanese university department，” Research Evaluation， Vol. 24， No. 2 （2015）， pp. 146-157.
21 Tavares O.， Cardoso S. & Carvalho T. et al.， “Academic inbreeding in the Portuguese academia，” Higher Education， Vol. 69， No. 6 （2015）， pp. 991-1006.
22 Cole S.， “Age and scientific performance，” American Journal of Sociology， Vol. 84， No. 4 （1979）， pp. 958-977.
23 Oster S. M. & Hamermesh D. S.， “Aging and productivity among economists，” Review of Economics and Statistics， Vol. 80， No. 1 （1998）， pp. 154-156.
24 Zhang X.， Liao H. & Li N. et al.， “Playing it safe for my family： exploring the dual effects of family motivation on employee productivity and creativity，” Academy of Management Journal， Vol. 64， No. 6 （2020）， pp. 1923-1950.
25 Dutcher E. G.， “The effects of telecommuting on productivity： an experimental examination，” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization， Vol. 84， No. 1 （2012）， pp. 355-363.