|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]雷 环?钟 周?乔伟峰.“双一流”建设背景下中美研究型大学“学科”发展模式比较研究[J].清华大学教育研究,2018,(06):66-73.[doi:10.14138/j.1001-4519.2018.06.006608]
 LEI Huan ZHONG Zhou QIAO Wei-feng.A?Sino-US?Comparative?Study?of?Academic?Discipline?Development?in?the?Research?Universities?and?its?Implicationsfor?Double?First-rate?Development[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2018,(06):66-73.[doi:10.14138/j.1001-4519.2018.06.006608]
点击复制

“双一流”建设背景下中美研究型大学“学科”发展模式比较研究
分享到:

清华大学教育研究[ISSN:1001-4519/CN:11-1610/G4]

卷:
期数:
2018年06期
页码:
66-73
栏目:
教育改革与发展
出版日期:
2018-12-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
A?Sino-US?Comparative?Study?of?Academic?Discipline?Development?in?the?Research?Universities?and?its?Implicationsfor?Double?First-rate?Development
作者:
雷 环?钟 周?乔伟峰
清华大学
Author(s):
LEI Huan ZHONG Zhou QIAO Wei-feng
Tsinghua?University
关键词:
双一流建设学科建设研究型大学中美比较
Keywords:
Double first-rate academic discipline development research university comparative study between China and USA
分类号:
G649.21
DOI:
10.14138/j.1001-4519.2018.06.006608
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
本文提出“学科”具有权力-知识-组织三元结构,并在此基础上开展了中国和美国研究型大学在学科内涵、学科分类以及学科规模与学科评价三方面的比较研究,从中举例分析清华大学及我国若干“双一流”理工学科与美国若干所顶尖研究型大学的学科性发展指标,从而挖掘美国研究型大学值得我国学习借鉴的特征,反思我国以学科建设推动高等教育发展的战略优势与现有问题,进而提出完善学科分类、尊重学科发展规律、丰富学科评价方法等推进中国特色、世界一流学科建设的反思与建议。
Abstract:
This study proposes a tripartite model of power-knowledge-organization to understand the nature and function of academic discipline in the university. The study then applies this model to analyze the nature, classification, scale and evaluation of academic discipline in research universities in China and the USA. The analysis takes places at both national system level and the institutional level with special reference to Tsinghua University, a number of double first-rate universities and top-ranking American universities. The study discusses the key strength of American and Chinese research universities in academic discipline development respectively, draws implications for China to learn from the USA, and also reflects about how to strengthen the unique Chinese academic discipline system while tackling challenges and problems. The study concludes with recommendations for double first-rate development to innovate academic discipline classification, discover and follow the rules of academic development, and enrich academic evaluation.

相似文献/References:

[1]王建华.以创业思维重新理解学科建设[J].清华大学教育研究,2018,(04):40.
 WANG Jian-hua.Re - understand Disciplinary Development from an Entrepreneurial Thinking Perspective[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2018,(06):40.
[2]钟秉林.综合性大学教育学科发展若干问题探析[J].清华大学教育研究,2019,(04):1.
 ZHONG Bing-lin.Viewpoints?on?the?Development?of?the?Education Discipline?in?Comprehensive?Universities[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(06):1.
[3]张斌贤.教育学科本质上不是“应用学科”[J].清华大学教育研究,2019,(04):8.
 ZHANG Bin-xian.The?Education?Discipline?is?Not?an?Applied Discipline?in?Nature[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(06):8.
[4]尤 政.建设世界一流工科 引领工程教育发展[J].清华大学教育研究,2019,(03):1.
 YOU Zheng.Building?World-class?Engineering?Discipline?andLeading?the?Development?of?Engineering?Education[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(06):1.

更新日期/Last Update: 2018-12-20