Yujie Gao

Based on literature review and policy text analysis, this paper compares the faculty performance evaluation systems of research-oriented and application-oriented universities, identifying significant disparities in school-running orientation, evaluation orientation, indicator weight allocation and method selection. Research-oriented universities, governed by academic logic, suffer from the "scientific research indicator dilemma", with their reform focusing on breaking the "publication-only" quantificational worship and returning to academic reputation and quality orientation. Application-oriented universities, driven by market and community logic, emphasize practical competence and social service yet face "academic drift" and the difficulty of quantifying practical performance. Under the "breaking the five obsessions" policy, this paper constructs a theoretical framework of task, contextual and learning performance, and proposes reform paths featuring classified evaluation, multi-subject participation and developmental evaluation.

Faculty Performance; Evaluation System

[1] Ma Jianyun.The Generative Logic of Faculty Evaluation in Higher Education Institutions:Motivational Mechanisms,Rational Directions,and Implementation Paths[J].Inner Mongolia Social Sciences,2025,46(04):195-203. [2] Ou Yangguang,You Zihuan.Evolutionary Logic and Reform Approaches of Teaching Evaluation for University Teachers in China from the Perspective of Teaching Academia[J].Higher Education Development and Evaluation,2025,41(04):1-10+129. [3] Sun Lizhi.Research on the Reform of University Teacher Evaluation Based on the Perspective of Teachers'Teaching Investment[J].China Higher Education,2025,(10):60-64. [4] Zhang Jihé,Zhou Wenwen.Indicator traps and governance strategies in university faculty evaluation under performance accountability system orientation[J].Heilongjiang Higher Education Research,2025,43(04):68-75. [5] Zhang D,Shi D.Reflections on and Transcendence of Performanceism in University Faculty Evaluation[J].Inner Mongolia Social Sciences,2025,46(04):186-194. [6] Shao Liuguo,Kong Xiangxu,Li Huijun,et al.Do university teachers themselves abandon the"Five Onlys"evaluation:A text analysis of peer expert review for professional title promotion in high-level research universities[J].China Soft Science,2025,(09):1-11. [7] Zhu Laibin.Exploration of Construction Pathways for"Dual-qualified and Dual-skilled"Faculty Teams from the Perspective of Transformation in Local Undergraduate Universities[J].Academic Exploration,2016,(12):149-152. [8] Wang Yan,Tang Zhisong.Has the evaluation of representative works by university teachers been truly implemented?A textual analysis based on the professional title evaluation methods for university teachers[J].Education Development Research,2025,45(01):67-75. [9] Zhu Yanjun,Zhang Jun.Why is the implementation of teacher evaluation reform policies hindered in higher education institutions in the new era?—A case study of a local university's reform[J].Education Development Research,2025,45(19):74-84. [10] Wang Honghong.Exploration of Development Pathways for Professional Practical Teaching Competencies Among Young Faculty in Applied Undergraduate Universities[J].Western Quality Education,2025,11(22):124-127. [11] Huang Jingfeng,Yan Lei,Wan Jiaxin,et al.Research on Evaluation of Scientific Research Competence of Teachers in Applied Undergraduate Universities:A Case Study of Zhejiang Wanli University[J].Journal of Zhejiang Wanli University,2025,38(06):98-105. [12] Xue Xinghua,Yang Jiewei.Research on the Construction of"Dual-qualified"Faculty in Sports Programs at Applied Universities under Digital Transformation[J].Tianzhong Academic Journal,2025,40(05):143-147. [13] Bao Yongqiang,Wang Mulan,Liang Ruiyu,et al.Research on Evaluation of Research Competence for Applied University Teachers Based on GFMG-SVM Model[J].Electronic Devices,2019,42(05):1081-1084. [14] Wang Cheng.Competency Research of Teachers in Applied Undergraduate Universities under Multifaceted Academic Perspectives[J].Education Review,2017,(01):48-51. [15] Li Xingzhou,Tang Wenxiu,Wang Zhiyong.Teaching evaluation literacy of university teachers:connotative characteristics,practical challenges and cultivation pathways[J].Journal of Nanjing Normal University(Social Sciences Edition),2024,(04):47-57. [16] Qin Yifan,Zhang Xinping.Path dependence and its breakthrough in the teacher evaluation system of Chinese higher education institutions[J].Modern University Education,2024,40(02):86-92. [17] Gao Jinyong.Quantitative Dimensions in University Faculty Evaluation and Their Correction[J].Jiangsu Higher Education,2024,(03):44-52. [18] Mei Xiongjie,Ji Guojun.Teaching Evaluation System for College Teachers in the New Era:Humanistic Reflection and Reconstruction Directions[J].China Higher Education Research,2023,(12):40-47. [19] Boyer,E.L.(1990).Scholarship Reconsidered:Priorities of the Professoriate.Princeton University Press. [20] Thornton,P.H.,Ocasio,W.,&Lounsbury,M.(2012).The institutional logics perspective:A new approach to culture,structure,and process.Oxford University Press. [21] Shulman,L.S.(1987).Knowledge and teaching:Foundations of the new reform.Harvard Educational Review,57(1),1-23. [22] Daniel,B.(2015).Big Data and analytics in higher education:Opportunities and challenges.British Journal of Educational Technology,46(5),904-920.

点击下载PDF