PeerReviewandInterdisciplinaryResearch同行評議與跨學(xué)科研究PPT課件

1、Peer Review and Interdisciplinary Research同行評議與跨學(xué)科研究Dalian Workshop on Peer Review, Research Integrity, and the Governance of Science“同行評議，研究誠信與科學(xué)治理”大連研討會May 23, 2012Robert Frodeman羅伯特弗洛德曼 Professor of PhilosophyDirector, Center for the Study of InterdisciplinarityUniversity of North Texaswww.csid.u

2、哲學(xué)系教授跨學(xué)科研究中心主任北德克薩斯大學(xué)Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity跨學(xué)科研究中心 University of North Texas 北德克薩斯大學(xué) Center Research中心研究內(nèi)容-theory of future of knowledge production, via case studies-未來知識生產(chǎn)的理論以案例研究的形式。-dedisciplining philosophy and the humanities -哲學(xué)與人文學(xué)科的去學(xué)科化-redefining academic rigor and

3、 expertise-重新定義學(xué)術(shù)的“嚴(yán)格性”和“專業(yè)知識”My argument: 我將論證：1. The end of the age of disciplinarity 1.學(xué)科化的時代已經(jīng)走到了盡頭2. Peer has been a disciplinary concept2.同行是一個學(xué)科化的概念3. Peer is incoherent when applied to interdisciplinary knowledge3. 當(dāng)同行被用于跨學(xué)科的知識時，將會出現(xiàn)矛盾。4. Consequences: goodbye Descartes; end of academic capi

4、talism4. 后果：再見笛卡爾；學(xué)術(shù)資本主義的終結(jié)1. Disciplinarity isnt going away, just its status as the end of knowledge. 1. 學(xué)科本身并不會終結(jié)，終結(jié)的是它的支配性以及作為知識目的目的的地位。Disciplinary knowledge was complete because 學(xué)科化的知識是完備的，是因?yàn)?Knowledge was seen as inherently beneficial-知識被看作為具有天生的有用性-There was an automatic connection between k

5、nowledge production and its use-知識生產(chǎn)和它的應(yīng)用之間的聯(lián)系是自動實(shí)現(xiàn)的。-With no clear connection to users, knowledge production became an infinite project-因?yàn)榕c使用者之間沒有明確的聯(lián)系，知識生產(chǎn)成為了一種無盡的工程。In the 21st Century 在二十一世紀(jì) DKP will continue, but it will no longer be the end or goal of knowledge production. 學(xué)科化的知識生產(chǎn)還將繼續(xù)，但是將不再作為

6、知識生產(chǎn)的目的或目標(biāo)。DKP cannot address the problems we face, which are學(xué)科化的知識生產(chǎn)不能解決我們面臨的問題，包括：complex and integrative in nature 本性上是復(fù)雜的和綜合的exceed disciplinary frames 超出學(xué)科的框架mixes facts/values, and 事實(shí)與價值的混合，以及occur in real time 實(shí)時發(fā)生The governance mechanism of the academy 學(xué)術(shù)界的監(jiān)督機(jī)制Secured academic autonomy; kept

7、 non-experts at a distance 確保學(xué)術(shù)的自主性；把非專家身份的人排除在外。A disciplinary concept, now breaking down 一個學(xué)科化的概念，不能打破。2. The Idea of a Peer2.同行的概念3. Peer Review and Interdisciplinary Knowledge3. 同行評議與跨學(xué)科知識 The problem: 問題：wicked problems require interdisciplinary (not merely multi-disciplinary) approaches and mu

8、ltitudes of experts 一些棘手的問題需要跨學(xué)科（不僅僅是多學(xué)科）的方法和眾多的專家Impossible to find experts who can review the integrated nature of the research 不可能找到能夠評審具有綜合性質(zhì)的研究的專家Conclusion: the concept of (disciplinary) peer review becomes incoherent 結(jié)論：（學(xué)科化的）同行評議概念已不合時宜Descartes, Modernity, Disciplinarity:笛卡爾，現(xiàn)代性，學(xué)科性Simple notion of rigor (certainty), versus than a contextual sense balancing epistemology with time, audience, relevance, $ （確定性的簡單關(guān)注，時間、對象、相關(guān)性、資金在認(rèn)識論方面的語