摘要
本文借用加拿大安大略省的案例描述一种特定的专业评估方法是如何窒息学术多样性和创新的。这个案例将阐释我们已经注意到的存在于当今北美大学里的几种因素———对有限资助的担忧、随之而来的对问责制和质量的关注以及自然科学的主导作用———是如何汇聚于一个专业评估模式的框架之内 ,既限制了学术发展 ,也妨碍了对学生和社会的服务。作者强调 ,无论如何 ,学科之间的差异是任何评估体系也改变不了的现实 ;一个不合理的评估体系会把某些学科置于只适合于其他学科的框架之内 ,从而阻碍了它们的发展。最终使大学里性质各异的部分结合在一起的是它们之间相互的独立性和共同的对真理的执著追求。一个分权化的评估过程承认多中心专家的自主性 ,并且会大大加强上述这两点。
This paper draws on the experience of Ontario, Canada, to describe how one particular approach to program evaluation works to stifle academic diversity and innovation. This case illustrates how several factors which have been noted in the contemporary North American university-concern about funding limitations, consequent preoccupation with accountability and quality, and dominance of the sciences-have come together within the framework of a model of program evaluation to restrict both academic development and service to students and the community. The author maintains, at any rate, the differences among the disciplines are a reality that no appraisal system can change;an inappropriate appraisal system can only retard development of some disciplines by casting them in a framework which is suitable for others. Ultimately, what binds the disparate parts of the university together is their mutual interdependence and their common commitment to the search for truth. Both would be enhanced considerably by a decentralization of the appraisals process in which the autonomy of multiple centers of connoisseurship were recognized.
出处
《北京大学教育评论》
2004年第2期23-32,共10页
Peking University Education Review
