www射-国产免费一级-欧美福利-亚洲成人福利-成人一区在线观看-亚州成人

US EUROPE AFRICA ASIA 中文
China / Corruption

In quest of an antidote for academic corruption

By Susan D. Blum (China Daily) Updated: 2012-11-09 10:04

Integrity and respect for knowledge trump coercion and cash rewards

I recently had the privilege of appearing on China Radio International to discuss the problem of Chinese academic corruption and the new Ministry of Education guidelines designed to combat them. Among the profound questions we looked at - Is this in fact a problem? Is it worse in China than elsewhere? Who is responsible? - was one about the causes of what we agreed are huge, sudden increases in academic corruption. Are the principal causes associated with social and economic structures, or they primarily cultural?

Structural reasons include the sources of funding: because the government remains the principal source of funding for institutions of higher education, they are forced to compete with each other on the basis of rubrics, including the number of publications of their faculty. International rankings similarly depend on publications. All this leads to a temptation to inflate the number of publications, sometimes by repeat publications (a violation of international academic ethics), copying the work of others, fabricating research findings, including scientific data, and more.

Other structural reasons include the recent "massification" of higher education, the sudden and spectacular increase in the numbers of people involved in this world, both as students and as faculty. From a participation rate of about 3 percent just 20 years ago, about a quarter of Chinese youth are now in higher education. Chinese higher education involves more students (30 million) than any other country's system.

Cultural reasons for academic corruption include a general atmosphere of corruption, ideas about authorship, the role of students and subordinates, ideas of success and pedagogy, and the place of originality. Among these reasons we would want to explore the basic expectations for what the role of students should be in generating new scholarship, at what level of education, and whether earlier levels of schooling teach students obedience and recitation of authoritative sources or whether creativity is inculcated from the start.

How we assess the relative importance of structural causes in contrast to cultural ones would influence the approach taken to the rule of law in contrast to rule by law. The new policies aim to influence from the top down. Other approaches contrast the incorporation of standards to fear of punishment.

How can these undesirable practices be deterred? Who is responsible, and at what moment, for preventing students from copying? Should their academic advisers be held accountable? The new guidelines suggest so.

If the goal of scholarship is to get published, rather than to contribute in a meaningful and substantial way to the growth of knowledge, then any method is acceptable. Academic life is not usually so lucrative that people enter it to get wealthy. Usually people have some drive to know and learn.

My suggestion, writing as an outsider who has been studying Chinese society and culture for more than 30 years, is to foster appreciation at every level for contributing to shared knowledge, while recognizing the competitive aspects of a zero-sum scramble for limited funds and honors. This is hard to accomplish and will never be perfect.

Laws from above, financial rewards, promotions, and grades, which psychologists call extrinsic motivations, cannot truly transform the ways academic writers and aspiring student researchers conduct their work.

The 17th-century Italian scientist Galileo Galilei was so taken by his search for the true meaning of the cosmos that he was willing to risk the full ire of the medieval Catholic Church. Most academics are less courageous and less creative than that, but I cite this example to show that structures of reward cannot possibly be the sole mover of academic action.

Instead, the motivations must be at least partially intrinsic, coming from inside the researcher.

When so much of the writer must be bestowed on the work, as must be the case in producing academic research, simply avoiding severe punishment cannot be the primary motivation. The goals must first be a thirst for knowledge, a desire to learn and share the learning, and - though it sounds innocent and even naive in these cynical times - a quest for truth. Producing degrees and publishing laboratory results, cannot possibly be the same as producing a cheaper trash can. The standards must be both internal and external.

Until this has been accomplished through a combination of structural and cultural changes, the fight against misconduct and corruption will remain with us.

The author is professor and chair of anthropology at the University of Notre Dame, Indiana. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

(China Daily 11/09/2012 page9)

Highlights
Hot Topics

...
主站蜘蛛池模板: 国产精品视频九九九 | 国产精品19禁在线观看2021 | 一区二区精品在线观看 | 国产成人精品综合久久久软件 | 久久精品视频3 | 亚洲免费一 | 一区二区在线看 | 欧美另类 videos黑人极品 | 欧美巨大精品videos | 手机在线观看一级午夜片 | 婷婷久久久五月综合色 | 特级毛片全部免费播放a一级 | 国内精品1区1区3区4区 | 欧美丝袜自拍 | 三级国产精品 | 成年女人毛片免费观看97 | 亚欧视频在线观看 | 国产日韩欧美在线观看播放 | 小明台湾成人永久免费看看 | 欧美色操 | 欧美a级完整在线观看 | 日本aaaa片毛片免费 | 日韩在线一区二区 | 好叼操这里只有精品 | 一级毛片免费不卡夜夜欢 | 中文乱码字幕午夜无线观看 | 成年女人毛片免费视频 | 中文字幕久久亚洲一区 | 一区二区伦理 | 国产免费怡红院视频 | 99视频在线精品免费观看18 | 国产精品成人一区二区 | 草草日| 色多多最新地址福利地址 | 成人影院久久久久久影院 | 欧美一区二区三区视视频 | 欧美成人做性视频在线播放 | 久久一区二区精品 | 性色a v 一区 | 欧美日韩精品一区二区三区高清视频 | 在线观看亚洲天堂 |