7/2018 vol. 14
Stats
CC-BY 4.0
Get citation
RESEARCH PAPER
What Factors of the Applicants are Influencing the Performance of Research Science Education? A Back-chaining Evaluation Based on the Data of China National Science Foundation
Huping Shang 1
,
 
Qingying Han 1
,
 
Yan Li 2
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Zhou Enlai School of Government, Nankai University, Tianjin CHINA
 
2
Division of Hunanities and Social Sciences, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian CHINA
 
 
Online publication date: 2018-04-26
 
 
Publication date: 2018-04-26
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(7):2803-2815
DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/89519
 
 
Article (PDF)
References (32)
 
KEYWORDS
research performance
back-chaining performance evaluation
applicant
influencing factors
 
TOPICS
Evaluation and Assessment
Science Education
 
ABSTRACT
How to predict the performance of an applicant is a core issue in the process of research project funding. Unlike the traditional way, we use a back-chaining evaluation method to test what factors of an applicant are influencing the performance of the research project based on the data of Chinese National Science Foundation. We find that the gender never affects the performance, and the age group of 41-45 is significantly helpful in improving the performance, but the age group of 46-50 obviously does harm in improving the performance. What’s more, the affiliation of 211-poject university could do good to the performance, while the educational or academic titles of academician and Yangtze River Scholar prevent the applicants from improving their performances. According to these findings, we advice to take the measures of implementing some specific research projects, some special projects, and some exclusive projects to varied research groups to improve the research performance.
 
REFERENCES (32)
1.
Bentley, J. T., & Adamson, R. (2003). Gender differences in the careers of academic scientists and engineers: A literature review (Special report), National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf....
Google Scholar
 
 
2.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2005). Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review: Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of board of trustees’ decisions. Scientometrics, 63(2), 297-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
3.
Brouns, M. (2000). The gendered nature of assessment procedures in scientific research funding: The Dutch case. Higher Education in Europe, 25(2), 193-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/713669....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
4.
Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(8), 3157-3162. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
5.
Chan, Y., & Walmsley, R. P. (1997). Learning and understanding the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis-of-variance-by-ranks test for differences among three or more independent groups. Physical therapy, 77(12), 1755-1761. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/77....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
6.
Chinese State Statistical Bureau, Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology, & Chinese Ministry of Finance. (2010). Statistical Bulletin of National Scientific Input in 2010 [in Chinese]. http://www.most.gov.cn/kjbgz/2....
Google Scholar
 
 
7.
Daniel, H. D. (1993). Guardians of Science: Fairness and Reliability of Peer Review. New York: VCH Verlagsgesellschaft mbH. https://doi.org/10.1002/352760....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
8.
Demicheli, V., & Di Pietrantonj, C. (2007). Peer review for improving the quality of grant applications. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (2). https://doi.org/10.1002/146518....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
9.
Deng, G. H., Guo, J., & Zhang, X. Q. (2009). Studies in review system of scientific research project approval [in Chinese]. Scientific Research Management, (1), 49-55.
Google Scholar
 
 
10.
Fagerland, M. W., & Sandvik, L. (2009). The wilcoxon–mann–whitney test under scrutiny. Statistics in Medicine, 28(10), 1487-1497. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.35....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
11.
Hartmann, I. (1990). Begutachtung in der Forschungsfo¨rderung. Die Argumente der Gutachter in der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. Frankfurt: R.G. Fischer.
Google Scholar
 
 
12.
Hartmann, I., & Neidhardt, F. (1990). Peer review at the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Scientometrics, 19(5), 419-425. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0202....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
13.
Henderson, T., & Taylor, K. (2009). Eye on the horizon-evaluating the impact of the CSIRO Flagship Program. Poster at the 11th Annual Conference of the Australasian Research Management Society (ARMS). Retrieved on November 2009 from http://www.arms2009.org/.
Google Scholar
 
 
14.
Horner, K. L., Rushton, J. P., & Vernon, P. A. (1986). Relation between aging and research productivity of academic psychologists. Psychology and Aging, 1(4), 319.
Google Scholar
 
 
15.
Jin, T. J., & Yuan, J. J. (2011). Relation mode between government and enterprise and the revolute rules [in Chinese]. Social Science in China, (1), 102-118.
Google Scholar
 
 
16.
Kao, C. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of econometrics, 90(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
17.
Kyvik, S. (1990). Age and scientific productivity. Differences between fields of learning. Higher Education, 19(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0014....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
18.
Langfeldt, L. (2001). The decision-making constraints and processes of grant peer review, and their effects on the review outcome. Social Studies of Science, 31(6), 820-841. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
19.
Liu, J. R., Zhu, Y., & Wang, Y. Z. (2005). Rational analysis of cadres with double duties at colleges and universities [in Chinese]. Higher Engineering Education Research, (6), 48-50.
Google Scholar
 
 
20.
Liu, Z. Y. (2004). Review for scientific research project approval in the process of government funding [in Chinese]. Basic Science in China, (4), 46-49.
Google Scholar
 
 
21.
Merton, R. K. (1973). The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1126/scienc....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
22.
Reinhart, M. (2009). Peer review of grant applications in biology and medicine. Reliability, fairness, and validity. Scientometrics, 81(3), 789-809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
23.
Shang, H. P., & Yu, W. X. (2013). Assessing Chinese managerial competencies from different perspectives. Social Behavior and Personality: an International Journal, 41(9), 1469-1485. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.20....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
24.
Shang, H. P., Jin, T. J., & Liu, W. (2016). Is harmony still in the local socialist officials’ hearts: An exploratory assessment of Chinese county and department level officials? Chinese Management Studies, 10(3), 480-509. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-07....
CrossRef
 
Google Scholar
 
 
25.
Shang, H. P., Ye, J., & Zhao, P. P. (2012). Public finance efficiency of scientific research in China: low efficiency, ineffectiveness and waste [in Chinese]. Studies in Science of Science, (10), 1470-1472.
Google Scholar
 
 
26.
Shen, W. Q. (2010-9-7). Scientific research funding should be away from power and ways of people [in Chinese]. People’s Daily.
Google Scholar
 
 
27.
Shi, X. Q., & Fan, Z. Q. (2007). Data analysis and statistical modeling/statistical method in social science research [in Chinese]. Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House.
Google Scholar
 
 
28.
Shi, Y., & Rao, Y. (2010). China’s research culture [in Chinese]. Science, 329(5996), 1128-1128.
Google Scholar
 
 
29.
Wan, G. (2013). Rage and distress about scientific research corruption [in Chinese]. Retrieved from http://news.sohu.com/20131012/....
Google Scholar
 
 
30.
Wang, P. T. (1983). Factors in raising scientific efficiency [in Chinese]. Scientology and S&T Management, (5), 38-39.
Google Scholar
 
 
31.
Xu, B. (2012). Scientific research funds increase year by year [in Chinese]. Retrieved from http://www.cnstock.com/roll/20....
Google Scholar
 
 
32.
Zhou, C. X. (2006). Approval of scientific research project based on grey theory [in Chinese]. Scientology and S&T management, (4), 39-43.
Google Scholar
 
 
Share
Send by email
Indexes
 
Keywords index
Topics index
Authors index
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
Scroll to top