J. Brzeziński
{"title":"Uniwersytet – nauki humanistyczne i społeczne – państwo","authors":"J. Brzeziński","doi":"10.14746/cis.2021.52.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the Great Charter of Universities as a point of departure, the author discusses the four tasks of the university: (1) search for the truth (2) education which supplies students them with the latest scientific knowledge and the skills that knowledge justifies (3) student formation in the spirit of tolerance, pluralism and openness to dialogue, (4) popularizing scientific knowledge. For their accomplishment to be unconstrained (by ideological, religious, xenophobic or economic limitations), as well as effective and ethical, the university must be free and autonomous. Nowadays humanities and social sciences are particularly exposed to factors that damage or hinder this autonomy and freedom, which is regrettably the case especially in countries that declare attachment to democratic values, yet trample them at the same time. \nThe author is very critical of the state’s policy of evaluating scholarly activities of universities based on converting scientific output into points. According to the author, this produces a greatly simplified and distorted picture of their achievements. What is more, it also encourages certain academics (for whom „survival” at a given institute or department is at stake) to engage in unethical behaviour: plagiarism of other people’s works, falsification of empirical research results, fabrication of findings, guest authorship, ghost authorship. One of the major solutions aimed to counter such unethical practices is to depart from bibliometric evaluation (via IF, H index) in favour of peer review. It is also necessary to implement new publishing practices, which would require replication of empirical studies, access to raw results provided by authors, as well as preregistration assessment of research projects so as to take works in which positive results were not obtained (thus failing to bear out the initial hypothesis) into consideration as well.","PeriodicalId":444061,"journal":{"name":"Człowiek i Społeczeństwo","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Człowiek i Społeczeństwo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/cis.2021.52.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以《大学大宪章》为出发点,作者论述了大学的四项任务:(1)寻求真理;(2)教育学生,向他们提供最新的科学知识和知识证明的技能;(3)以宽容、多元和开放对话的精神培养学生;(4)普及科学知识。为了使他们的成就不受(意识形态、宗教、仇外或经济限制)的约束,并且有效和合乎道德,大学必须是自由和自主的。如今,人文科学和社会科学特别容易受到损害或阻碍这种自主和自由的因素的影响,令人遗憾的是,这种情况尤其发生在那些宣称坚持民主价值观,但同时又践踏民主价值观的国家。作者对国家将科研成果转化为分数来评价大学学术活动的政策持批评态度。作者认为,这大大简化和歪曲了他们的成就。更重要的是,它还鼓励某些学者(对他们来说,在特定研究所或部门的“生存”岌岌可危)从事不道德的行为:抄袭他人的作品、伪造实证研究结果、捏造研究结果、客串作者、代写作者。对抗这种不道德做法的主要解决方案之一是放弃文献计量评估(通过IF、H指数),转而采用同行评议。也有必要实施新的出版实践,这将需要复制实证研究,获取作者提供的原始结果,以及对研究项目进行预注册评估,以便将未获得积极结果(因此未能证实初始假设)的作品也考虑在内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Uniwersytet – nauki humanistyczne i społeczne – państwo
With the Great Charter of Universities as a point of departure, the author discusses the four tasks of the university: (1) search for the truth (2) education which supplies students them with the latest scientific knowledge and the skills that knowledge justifies (3) student formation in the spirit of tolerance, pluralism and openness to dialogue, (4) popularizing scientific knowledge. For their accomplishment to be unconstrained (by ideological, religious, xenophobic or economic limitations), as well as effective and ethical, the university must be free and autonomous. Nowadays humanities and social sciences are particularly exposed to factors that damage or hinder this autonomy and freedom, which is regrettably the case especially in countries that declare attachment to democratic values, yet trample them at the same time. The author is very critical of the state’s policy of evaluating scholarly activities of universities based on converting scientific output into points. According to the author, this produces a greatly simplified and distorted picture of their achievements. What is more, it also encourages certain academics (for whom „survival” at a given institute or department is at stake) to engage in unethical behaviour: plagiarism of other people’s works, falsification of empirical research results, fabrication of findings, guest authorship, ghost authorship. One of the major solutions aimed to counter such unethical practices is to depart from bibliometric evaluation (via IF, H index) in favour of peer review. It is also necessary to implement new publishing practices, which would require replication of empirical studies, access to raw results provided by authors, as well as preregistration assessment of research projects so as to take works in which positive results were not obtained (thus failing to bear out the initial hypothesis) into consideration as well.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信