重建学术评价机制的逻辑起点——从“核心期刊”、“来源期刊”排行榜谈起

近年来,每一新版"核心期刊"、"来源期刊"的发布都会在学术界和期刊界引起强烈震动,"以刊评文"盛行使学术评价的危机正在显现。危机的表象是被异化和简化成排行榜的学术评价大行其道,在危机的背后是评价机构与评价对象间双重的信息不对称,危机的后果则是学术批评的式微与学术诚信的缺失。面对危机,却难觅具有操作性的"以刊评文"的替代方案。尽管学术评价应回归学术共同体的评价基本已成学界共识,但如何才能体现公正仍是悬而未决的问题。解决的唯一办法就在于学术民主,由学术共同体的代表根据"民意"来进行评价,并有效地接受学术共同体的监督。因此,表达"民意"和进行监督的平台至关重要,最合适的平台无过于学术期刊。真正能成为某一学术共同体交流对话平台的学术期刊必须具有学科专业(专题)边界清晰、开放、通畅传播这三个特征,而目前却鲜有这样的平台。因此,重建学术评价机制的逻辑起点应该是,改变封闭和半封闭的综合性期刊占据多数的现状,建立起以开放的专业(专题)期刊为主并能通畅传播的学术期刊体系。

Legitimate Starting Point for Reconstructing Academic Evaluation System: Based on Various Kinds of Journal Ranking

Paper evaluation based on the publications of different levels puts this much-practiced evaluation system at stake.In front of this crisis,there is no substitution to find.It is agreed that academic evaluation must return to the evaluation given by the academic community,and yet the question remains: how is the fairness to be realized? It can be sure that democracy is an only way out.As main podium for airing out public opinion,an academic journal must define itself with a clear subject boundary and such characters as being open and free in communication.It is thus natural that a legitimate starting point for the reconstruction of academic evaluation system lies in the action that journals must made to be open in its subject matters.