Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA.
Mol Biol Cell. 2012 Sep;23(17):3285-9. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E12-06-0490.
Evaluation of scientific work underlies the process of career advancement in academic science, with publications being a fundamental metric. Many aspects of the evaluation process for grants and promotions are deeply ingrained in institutions and funding agencies and have been altered very little in the past several decades, despite substantial changes that have taken place in the scientific work force, the funding landscape, and the way that science is being conducted. This article examines how scientific productivity is being evaluated, what it is rewarding, where it falls short, and why richer information than a standard curriculum vitae/biosketch might provide a more accurate picture of scientific and educational contributions. The article also explores how the evaluation process exerts a profound influence on many aspects of the scientific enterprise, including the training of new scientists, the way in which grant resources are distributed, the manner in which new knowledge is published, and the culture of science itself.
科学工作的评估是学术科学职业发展的基础，而出版物则是一个基本的衡量标准。在过去几十年中，尽管科研队伍、资助格局以及科学研究方式发生了重大变化，但对于资助和晋升的评估过程的许多方面都深深地根植于机构和资助机构中，几乎没有改变。本文探讨了如何评估科学生产力，它奖励了什么，它的不足之处在哪里，以及为什么比标准简历/个人简介更丰富的信息可能更能准确地反映科学和教育贡献。本文还探讨了评估过程如何对科学事业的许多方面产生深远影响，包括新科学家的培训、拨款资源的分配方式、新知识的出版方式以及科学文化本身。
