|
|
|
| A Four-Dimensional Examination of the Research Competitiveness of History Discipline in Chinese and American Universities from the Perspective of the New Liberal Arts |
| Lu Junxia1, Chen Zhenying2 |
1.School of History, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
2.Library, Zhejiang University , Hangzhou 310027, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract In the context of the new liberal arts, the development of philosophy and social sciences is expected to combine historical inheritance with contemporary innovation, and focus on the construction of independent knowledge systems. This article innovatively proposes an evaluation index system of historical discipline competitiveness from four dimensions: research productivity, research influence, research development power, and international cooperation power, based on the comprehensive exploration of existing evaluation indicators of discipline competitiveness and drawing on internationally recognized indicators, combined with the characteristics of humanities and scientific research achievements. Ten universities in China and the United States from 2014 to 2023 have been selected to analyze their research competitiveness in four dimensions and development trends: publication scale, total citations, subject normalized citation influence, top 10% journal publication and proportion, and number and proportion of international cooperative papers.In terms of productivity research, the publication scale of American universities is significantly higher than that of Chinese universities, but the annual publication quantity of Chinese universities has significantly increased, with a growth rate significantly higher than that of American universities. In terms of research influence dimension, American universities and Chinese universities each have their own advantages in performance. American universities perform better than Chinese universities in terms of total citation frequency and the top 10% of high citations, but Chinese universities perform better than American universities in terms of the 10% proportion of high citations in the top 10%. The FWCI values of 10 universities in China and the United States are all higher than the global average, and there is not much difference between Chinese and American universities. The trend of research influence in Chinese universities has shown excellent performance, with the number of highly cited TOP10% papers and the proportion of highly cited TOP10% papers showing continuous growth, with a significant growth rate. The level of influence of the two is constantly approaching. In terms of research development and trend dimensions, American universities still maintain significant advantages, but the proportion of top journals in Chinese universities is outstanding, and historical research in Chinese universities shows better development potential. From the perspective of international cooperation strength and development trends, the number of international cooperation papers by American universities is significantly higher than that of Chinese universities. However, the top three universities in terms of international cooperation papers are all Chinese universities, indicating that Chinese universities have a significant advantage in international cooperation competitiveness. In terms of development trend, the proportion of international cooperative papers in American universities has remained stable in the past 10 years, while the proportion of international cooperative papers in Chinese universities has fluctuated significantly in the past 10 years, with a slight decrease in the past 3 years, which is worth paying attention to. To some extent, it indicates that Chinese universities have higher research quality and relatively balanced overall research influence.It is recommended that Chinese universities increase research investment in research productivity, increase funding support for historical research, strengthen the introduction and cultivation of historical talents, improve overall research capabilities, and strive for excellence in research influence. They should identify their own characteristics and advantages, promote interdisciplinary and integration, and foster new academic growth points. In terms of research development dimension, continuous innovation in research fields and methods has promoted the in-depth development of historical research. Importance should be attached to strengthening international cooperation and exchange in the dimension of international cooperation, introducing international resources, establishing international cooperation mechanisms, and paying more attention to the combination of Chinese characteristics and international standards.
|
|
Received: 25 March 2024
|
|
|
|
1 习近平：《在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上的讲话》，2016年5月17日，http：//www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2016-05/18/c_1118891128.htm，2024年6月27日。
2 中华人民共和国教育部：《新文科建设工作会在山东大学召开》，2020年11月3日，http：//www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/s5987/202011/t20201103_498067.html，2024年6月27日。
3 《习近平致第二十二届国际历史科学大会的贺信》，2015年8月23日，http：//www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2015-08/23/c_1116344061.htm，2024年6月27日。
4 陈剑琦：《美国重视历史学科建设》，《比较教育研究》2003年第4期，第91页。
5 习近平：《习近平致中国社会科学院中国历史研究院成立的贺信》，2019年1月3日，http：//www.xinhuanet.com/politics/leaders/2019-01/03/c_1123942672.htm，2024年6月27日。
6 邱均平、马凤：《中国高校在建设世界一流大学过程中的进步和问题——基于2011年〈世界一流大学与科研机构学科竞争力评价〉的分析》，《中国高教研究》2012年第1期，第17-22页。
7 姜华、刘苗苗：《中国“C9”与澳大利亚“G8”联盟一流学科之比较分析——基于ESI和InCites数据库》，《中国高教研究》2017年第6期，第67-72页。
8 Ma R.， Ni C. & Qiu J.， “Scientific research competitiveness of world universities in computer science，” Scientometrics， Vol. 2， No. 76 （2008）， pp. 245-260.
9 赵婷婷、田贵平：《“高等教育强国”特征：基于高等教育中心转移的国际经验分析》，《国家教育行政学院学报》2019年第7期，第22-28，42页。
10 陈昌来、杨伊：《新文科背景下中国语言学学科的承继与发展》，《上海交通大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2024年第1期，第13-24页。 |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 54 
