Author(s)

Gang Chen, Shuping Wang, Hongling Li, Han Liu, Yan Zheng ,Huiling Hou, Yang Liu and Ameng Zhao

Corresponding Author

Gang Chen

Abstract

To explore whether the incorporation of more non-quantitative indicators into the evaluation system can help postgraduates improve their scientific research integrity. Methods The managers or doctoral supervisors with more than 10 years'experience in graduate education management were invited by mail. According to the requirements of the State Education Commission and the relevant regulations and professional training objectives of the Graduate Work Manual of our university, non-quantitative indicators for evaluating the research ability of graduate students were drawn up with the content of the mid-term assessment as the basic framework. Teachers and students were randomly selected to explain the non-quantitative evaluation indicators, and their opinions and attitudes towards the indicators were collected. After data checking and collating, EPIDATA 3.1 is used for input and SPSS 20.0 is used for data processing. Results A total of 20 experts participated in the formulation of evaluation indicators, including three first-level indicators and 11 second-level indicators, each of which was divided into four grades: failing, passing, good and excellent. A total of 135 postgraduate students were surveyed and 130 questionnaires were retrieved, with a recovery rate of 96.3%; 28 teachers were surveyed and 28 questionnaires were retrieved, with a recovery rate of 100.0%. Among them, 43 postgraduates (33.1%) thought the quantitative index was very useful, 31 (23.8%) thought it was more useful, 22 (16.9%) thought it was general, 19 (14.6%) thought it was completely ineffective, 15 (11.5%) thought it was counterproductive, 10 (35.7%) teachers thought it was very useful, 13 (46.4%) thought it was more useful, and 3 (10.7%) thought it was effective. Generally, one (3.6%) thought it was totally ineffective and one (3.6%) thought it was counterproductive; there was a significant difference in its constituent ratio. Conclusion Non-quantitative indicators have the potential to improve the integrity of Postgraduates in scientific research, so we can try to establish a practical assessment system.

Keywords

Non-quantitative indicators, Scientific research integrity, Postgraduate education