Editorials

Op-Ed Contributors

Chinese Press

Columnists

LETTERS

Quantity isn't quality in research work

(China Daily)
Updated: 2009-10-15 07:53

Since corruption and plagiarism plague the academia, an Education Department claim that China ranks fifth in the world in terms of research capacity according to the number of papers published has created a controversy. The prevalent over-quantification in the evaluation process threatens to degenerate academic circles further, says an article in Yanzhao Metropolis Daily. Excerpt:

Since 2004, China has ranked fifth in the world in terms of research capacity, preceded by the United States, Britian, Germany and Japan, if we take the number of published scientific papers into account.

Related readings:  Clinic research for umbilical cord blood stem cell transplant starts in Tianjin  China charts new course for polar research  Taiwan research department offers advice

But the number of published papers is only one of the factors that show a country's research capacity and cannot replace the comprehensive evaluation index. Also, the thought process that goes into research in science subjects is a highly spiritualized activity, which generates many forms of accomplishments.

Adopting a standardized rule to measure and evaluate all academic research works just like in a manufacturing industry is rather ridiculous and nave.

What's more, this over-quantification can lead academic research toward over-industrialization.

Some experts have already indicated that almost 90 percent of the thousands of published papers and books in China lack originality and/or creativity. For a long time, over-quantification has blown flamboyant academic bubbles, which feed academic corruption and deterioration.

More does not necessarily mean better. Many great scholars, who have made fundamental contributions to academic research, do not have a lot of published works because they focus their life on a few but essential areas. In their case, more could mean worse, which actually is the case in China's academic world.

Quantity is not quality. Equating them to overestimate our research capacity is not only being nave, but also reflects tendencies of narcissism and self-deceit. We should be alert against over-quantification in academic evaluation and adhere to the developmental approach in our already over-industrialized academia.

(China Daily 10/15/2009 page9)