论文部分内容阅读
我国试行了科学基金制,找到了一个在面上发展基础性研究的好办法,国家自然科学基金委员会(以下简称基金委)也把总经费的约71％用于资助面上项目。为了能从大量的申请中遴选出优秀项目予以资助,基金委提出了“依靠专家、发扬民主、择优支持、公正合理”的评审原则,并规定了相应的评审办法。在面上项目整个评审工作中,我们认为有三个重要的环节,即同行评议、学科综合和学科评审组评审。尽管这三个环节各有其独自的功能,而作为学科评审组评审这一环节,虽在一定程度上受同行评议和学科综合的制约,但它的意见对申请项目是否给予资助却有着决定性的作用。因此,这一环节如何把握以保证评审结果的科学性和合理性就很值得重视,并需在实践中逐步加以完善。本文主要就此问题做一点探讨。
Our country tried out a scientific fund system and found a good way to develop basic research on the surface. The National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) also allocated about 71% of the total funds to fund the program. In order to select outstanding projects from a large number of applications to be funded, the Commission put forward the appraisal principle of “relying on experts, promoting democracy, selecting the best support, fair and reasonable” and stipulating the corresponding assessment methods. In the overall assessment of the face of the project, we think there are three important links, namely, peer review, subject synthesis and subject evaluation group review. Although each of the three links has its own function, the evaluation of this link as a subject reviewer is, to a certain degree, constrained by peer review and subject synthesis. However, its opinion is decisive for whether to grant the application item effect. Therefore, how to grasp this aspect in order to ensure the scientific and reasonable assessment results is worthy of attention, and in practice need to be gradually improved. This article mainly on this issue to do some discussion.