(Source:"China Education News" March 22, 2021 No.Version 5）
Xia Wenbin
Constructing a systematic, scientific and complete evaluation system is an important prerequisite for promoting the high-quality development of higher education. Evaluation requires comparison, and there needs to be a system and mechanism to reward the superior and punish the inferior supported by a scientific indicator system. For a long time, the comparison of scores, papers, and professional titles that we have constructed in the process of educational practice cannot be said to be completely unreasonable. However, making this kind of comparison simple, hierarchical, and instrumental will lead to the alienation of the evaluation system, which will not only make it difficult for high-level talents and high-quality results to emerge, but will also seriously affect education and talent innovation. In this sense, breakingThe "Five Onlys" (only scores, only college entrance examinations, only diplomas, only essays, only hats) are imminent. At the same time, it is urgent to establish new evaluation standards as soon as possible. Educational evaluation reform cannot achieve success without breaking and establishing simultaneously.
First, eliminate simplification and establish a diversified education evaluation system.The so-called simplification refers to using one or two solidified rulers as the standard. This will inevitably lead to the failure to fully reflect the value of talents or achievements, and it is also difficult to determine a competitive ranking. For example, for a period of time, we have used scores as the yardstick to evaluate students. Whoever scores higher will be awarded honors such as postgraduate guarantee and outstanding student without hesitation. This single evaluation seems fair and easy to operate, but it obliterates the deep intrinsic value of talent cultivation. In addition, when teachers are promoted to professional titles, they often compare the number of papers and projects. Whoever writes more articles and has more funding for the project will have the upper hand. This seemingly fair approach has led to a single and one-sided evaluation system, and has also caused some talents and achievements to be eliminated because they do not meet this standard.
We must clearly get rid of the above-mentioned incorrect evaluation orientation, get to the bottom of things, and establish an evaluation system that conforms to the laws of talent growth. In this process, of course we have toThe word "broken" comes first, but this "broken" must be understood dialectically. Destruction is not a complete denial, but a kind of sublation. Marx once criticized Feuerbach for rejecting Hegel's idealism while also abandoning his dialectics, just like a confused old woman who, after giving a baby a bath, threw the baby and dirty water out the door. The key mistake of the previous "Five Onlys" was the word "only", which would inevitably lead to metaphysical errors. However, on the other hand, it did not talk about fractions and thesis at all, which is of course another level of metaphysics. This means that we must make it clear that scores, essays, etc. are necessary methods for educational development and cannot be completely and simply denied. This also means that we must quickly establish a diversified evaluation system for single evaluation, including evaluating students from multiple dimensions such as morality, intelligence, body, beauty, and labor, especially focusing on discovering students' strengths and weaknesses from aspects such as learning ability, social responsibility, and innovative spirit; for teachers' teaching and scientific research results, we should combine peer evaluation, internal and external evaluation, student evaluation, and social practice evaluation to fully grasp the value of teaching and scientific research.
The second is to eliminate hierarchy and establish a performance-oriented education evaluation system.For a long time, hierarchical evaluation has beenAn important manifestation of the "Five Wei". This evaluation orientation is confusing. For example, the reward orientation depends on which level the article is published, whether the award is national or provincial, which university the graduates come from, etc. These three-, six-, and nine-level evaluation methods cannot be said to be completely unreasonable, but the key point is that we were too "exclusive" before, which will inevitably lead to the lack of evaluation standards. The current "break" is to attack all kinds of unscientific "only" words, but it does not mean to completely deny national awards, well-known high-level papers and journals, etc. The key is to be good at transforming these talents and scientific research achievements that are objectively reflected at a certain level into a performance evaluation indicator system. This is what we should work on the word "establishment".
For the evaluation of talents and professional titles, high-level journals and other results certainly have important reference evaluation value, but they are not the only ones, and they cannot deprive other schools and journals of their right to compete. The reference for putting talents and achievements with different backgrounds on the same starting line is performance, which is to see whether these talents and achievements have solved major scientific frontiers and basic issues, whether they have solved pressing national economic and social problems, whether they have put forward ideas with important innovative significance, etc. Regardless of where a hero comes from, a true hero must be seen on the battlefield. At that time, Liang Shuming, who only had a high w88 casino diploma, was invited by Cai Yuanpei, the then president of Peking University, to serve as a lecturer at Peking University for his article "On the Study of Yuan's Judgment", thus becoming an academic master with a high reputation at home and abroad.
The third is to eliminate instrumentalization and establish an educational evaluation system that embodies the humanistic spirit.There are two problems with instrumental evaluation: First, living people are regarded as tools, and trained talents are regarded as tools and machines produced in factories. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a replicable and standardized evaluation index. This kind of evaluation seems scientific and precise, but it turns a dynamic and rich organic life into a“Zombie”, such an evaluation will definitely stifle people’s creativity. Second, it denies the diversity of individual life. Whether it is young students or teachers, due to differences in family background, psychological and cultural structure, academic interests, etc., they cannot be copied from a template like a tool. This requires us to teach students in accordance with their aptitude and classify them.
Education requires humanistic feelings, because education means“One tree shakes another, one cloud pushes another, one soul awakens another.” When Qian Zhongshu applied for the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature at Tsinghua University, he only scored 15 points in mathematics. However, he had a very strong foundation in literature and foreign languages. Luo Jialun, the then president of Tsinghua University, defied all objections and accepted him. He later became a famous writer and thinker. At present, we urgently need to establish an education evaluation system that embodies the humanistic spirit, resolutely eliminate the one-size-fits-all and cookie-cutter tool-based evaluation standards, accurately and deeply understand the strengths and weaknesses of each individual, and at the same time analyze the growth trajectory of each individual in depth from growth indicators and comparative indicators, and use an indicator system rich in humanistic feelings to encourage them to make continuous progress
(The author is the president of w88 casino)
Attached original text link:
