面向评价需求的ESI学科分类与我国一流学科类目的匹配研究

以ESI体系中22个学科和我国"双一流"建设中108个一流学科的匹配问题为研究对象,根据分类学原理,采用学科映射表等方法创造性地将二者相对应,试图打通中外两套评价体系因学科分类不匹配而导致的评价隔阂.文章首先论述了学科国际评估是"双一流"建设的迫切需要及其重要意义.其次,明确指出了ESI学科分类的三个特点及不足,即论文分类基于期刊,而学科分类则偏重自然科学;学科设置粗细不一,分类不尽完善;以大学科设置类别,不利于专业机构和院系评价等.然后,重点研究了ESI学科分类与我国一流学科类目的匹配办法,包括匹配路径、匹配方法等,除了采用学科映射表匹配之外,还创新性地采用期刊分布、文章分布、中国文章分布和中国第一作者文章分布等四个指标进行最后的匹配.最后,对匹配结果进行详细分析,并得出三点规律性的结论:(1)绝大多数一流学科可以匹配到一个占有绝对优势的主要ESI学科;(2)中国学者的发文倾向性决定次要ESI对应学科;(3)"自定"一流学科的匹配与某些学科出现重复.可以认为,本文的研究结果基本上解决了我国的世界一流学科评价中的"瓶颈"问题,为构建国内标准与国际标准相结合的世界一流学科的评价体系提供了重要支撑.

Research on the matching of ESI discipline classification and first-class discipline category in China for assessment requirements

This paper takes the matching problem of 22 disciplines in the ESI system and 108 first-class disciplines in Chinese "double first-class" construction as the research object, according to the principles of taxonomy, and using the discipline map and other methods to creatively correspond to the two, and tries to open up the evaluation gap between the Chinese and foreign evaluation systems due to the mismatch of discipline classification. It first discusses the urgent need and important significance of international assessment of disciplines for "double first-class" construction. Secondly, it clearly points out the three characteristics and shortcomings of ESI discipline classification, that is, the classification of papers is based on journals, while the discipline classification focuses on natural sciences; the discipline settings are different and the classification is not perfect; the setting of university disciplines is not conducive to professional institutions and department evaluation. Then, the research focuses on the matching methods of ESI discipline classification and Chinese first-class discipline categories, including matching paths, matching methods, etc. In addition to using discipline map matching, it also innovatively uses the four indicators of journal distribution, paper distribution, Chinese paper distribution, and Chinese first author paper distribution for final matching. Finally, the matching results are analyzed in detail, and three regular conclusions are drawn:(1) Most of the first-class disciplines can be matched with a major ESI discipline that has absolute advantages; (2) The tendency of Chinese scholars to publish paper determines the secondary ESI corresponding discipline; (3) The matching of "self-defined" first-class disciplines overlaps with some disciplines. The research results of this paper basically solve the "bottleneck" problem in Chinese world-class discipline evaluation, and provide important support for the construction of a world-class discipline evaluation system combining domestic standards with international standards.