本文選題：醫(yī)學(xué)研究生 + 博士質(zhì)量　； 參考：《中國醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 博士教育是當(dāng)代國際上公認(rèn)的正規(guī)高等教育的最高層次。博士生教育的質(zhì)量和數(shù)量是衡量一個(gè)國家高等教育發(fā)達(dá)程度和文化科學(xué)發(fā)展水平及其潛力與前景的一個(gè)重要標(biāo)志。自1978年我國恢復(fù)研究生教育制度以來,博士研究生教育一直受到社會各界的關(guān)注和重視。然而,近年來博士生規(guī)模的擴(kuò)大、博士生構(gòu)成的多樣化、畢業(yè)博士就業(yè)去向的變化以及知識生產(chǎn)模式的變化和大學(xué)管理模式的變化等,這一系列因素把博士教育和博士質(zhì)量推到了前臺。通過文獻(xiàn)查閱發(fā)現(xiàn),現(xiàn)階段社會各界對于博士質(zhì)量現(xiàn)狀評價(jià)褒貶不一,有的學(xué)者認(rèn)為在我國博士研究生數(shù)量快速增長的同時(shí),博士質(zhì)量呈下降趨勢；還有的學(xué)者認(rèn)為現(xiàn)階段博士質(zhì)量狀況跟過去相比幾乎處于持平狀態(tài)。面對這種現(xiàn)狀我們發(fā)現(xiàn),關(guān)于博士質(zhì)量現(xiàn)狀評價(jià)和博士培養(yǎng)制度改革的文獻(xiàn)研究進(jìn)行的相對較多,而關(guān)于博士質(zhì)量評價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的分析研究進(jìn)行的卻很少,且現(xiàn)在我國沒有一個(gè)明確的博士質(zhì)量評價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。本研究就是在這樣認(rèn)識的基礎(chǔ)之上,旨在通過對醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量評價(jià)的核心指標(biāo)進(jìn)行分析研究,為客觀地對醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行評價(jià)提供參考。 本研究對博士質(zhì)量的相關(guān)文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行研究發(fā)現(xiàn),目前國內(nèi)直接針對博士質(zhì)量內(nèi)涵的研究相對較少,大多是結(jié)合關(guān)于博士教育質(zhì)量的相關(guān)討論中進(jìn)行。通過分析匯總現(xiàn)階段對博士教育質(zhì)量的相關(guān)研究,我們認(rèn)為應(yīng)該把博士教育質(zhì)量分為三個(gè)層次,即博士教育的宏觀質(zhì)量、中觀質(zhì)量和微觀質(zhì)量,其中博士教育的微觀質(zhì)量即通常意義上的博士研究生質(zhì)量,也是本研究的主要研究對象。 本研究調(diào)查檢索到8個(gè)關(guān)于博士質(zhì)量評價(jià)的指標(biāo)體系和研究生綜合素質(zhì)評價(jià)的指標(biāo)體系進(jìn)行對比分析,對現(xiàn)階段我國博士研究生質(zhì)量評價(jià)的現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行了匯總,結(jié)果表明：現(xiàn)階段半數(shù)以上的質(zhì)量評價(jià)體系中把“基礎(chǔ)及專業(yè)知識水平”、“外語水平”、“創(chuàng)新素質(zhì)”、“思想品德及身心素質(zhì)”、“科研結(jié)果”“組織協(xié)調(diào)能力”、“獨(dú)立研究能力”七個(gè)方面作為評價(jià)研究生質(zhì)量及素質(zhì)的方面,只有少部分指標(biāo)體系中把“邏輯思維能力”和“分析解決問題的能力”單獨(dú)作為評價(jià)研究生質(zhì)量的方面加入質(zhì)量評價(jià)指標(biāo)體系中。 本研究進(jìn)一步對我國醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量評價(jià)的核心指標(biāo)的確立進(jìn)行了分析研究,從不同層面不同角度,結(jié)合學(xué)科特點(diǎn)和社會各方面對我國現(xiàn)階段醫(yī)學(xué)博士研究生教育的發(fā)展需要,最后將醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量的核心指標(biāo)歸納為六個(gè)方面,包括思考能力、學(xué)習(xí)能力、協(xié)調(diào)能力和執(zhí)行能力四個(gè)方面以及對整體質(zhì)量體現(xiàn)最強(qiáng)的創(chuàng)新能力和臨床學(xué)科獨(dú)有的專業(yè)技能。 本研究最后提出了在理想核心指標(biāo)下的醫(yī)學(xué)院校內(nèi)部質(zhì)量控制措施建議以及實(shí)施過程中的難點(diǎn)。 依據(jù)前述分析結(jié)果,本研究認(rèn)為：博士質(zhì)量評價(jià)是一個(gè)受經(jīng)濟(jì)社會發(fā)展水平、博士教育發(fā)展水平、評價(jià)主體觀念認(rèn)識、評價(jià)方法是否客觀有效等因素影響的紛繁復(fù)雜的過程。要對我國醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行評價(jià),首先應(yīng)該明確現(xiàn)階段我國醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量的評價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。通過分析討論,我們認(rèn)為醫(yī)學(xué)博士質(zhì)量的核心評價(jià)指標(biāo)首先應(yīng)該包括現(xiàn)階段我國最需要的也是最能體現(xiàn)博士質(zhì)量的創(chuàng)新能力,其次應(yīng)該包括“想、學(xué)、問、做”四個(gè)方面的科研能力,即思考能力、學(xué)習(xí)能力、協(xié)調(diào)能力和執(zhí)行能力,以及臨床學(xué)科博士研究生所特有的專業(yè)技能。
[Abstract]:Doctoral education is the highest level of formal higher education recognized internationally. The quality and quantity of doctoral education is an important symbol to measure the development level of higher education and the development level of cultural science and its potential and prospects in a country. Since the resumption of graduate education system in China in 1978, doctoral graduate education has always been However, in recent years, the scale of doctoral students, the diversity of doctoral students, the change in the direction of the graduates' employment, the changes in the mode of knowledge production and the changes in the mode of management of the University, this series of factors have pushed the doctoral education and the quality of the bloggers to the front desk. At the same time, some scholars believe that the quality of doctoral students is declining while the number of doctoral students in our country is increasing rapidly; and some scholars believe that the quality of doctors at the present stage is almost in the same state as that in the past. There are a lot of literature research on the status evaluation and the reform of the doctor training system, while the analysis and Research on the standard of doctor quality evaluation are very few, and there is no clear standard of doctor quality evaluation in our country. This study is based on this understanding and aims at the core of the quality evaluation of medical doctorate. Indicators are analyzed to provide reference for objectively evaluating the quality of doctorate.
The research on the doctoral quality in this study finds that there are relatively few studies on the quality of doctor's quality directly in China, most of which are combined with the related discussion on the quality of doctoral education. By analyzing and summarizing the relevant research on the quality of doctoral education at the present stage, we think that the quality of PhD education should be divided into three. At the same level, the macro quality, medium quality and micro quality of doctoral education, and the microcosmic quality of doctoral education, that is, the quality of doctoral graduate students in the general sense, is also the main object of this study.
In this study, 8 indexes system on the quality evaluation of doctorate and the index system of comprehensive quality evaluation of postgraduates are compared and analyzed. The present situation of the quality evaluation of doctoral graduates in China is summarized. The results show that more than half of the quality evaluation system at the present stage is "basic and professional knowledge level". "Foreign language level", "innovative quality", "moral character and physical and mental quality", "scientific research results", "organization and coordination ability", "independent research ability" as the evaluation of the quality and quality of the graduate students, only a few indicators of the "logical thinking ability" and "analysis of the ability to solve the problem" alone make the seven. In order to evaluate the quality of graduate students, the quality evaluation index system is added.
This study further analyzes the establishment of the core indicators for the quality evaluation of medical doctorate in China. From different angles and different angles, it combines the characteristics of the subject and the social aspects to the development needs of the doctor's postgraduate education at the present stage of our country. Finally, the core indexes of the quality of medical doctorate are summed up into six aspects, including thinking. Ability, learning ability, coordination ability and execution ability are four aspects, as well as the innovative ability of the overall quality and the unique professional skills of clinical disciplines.
At the end of this study, we put forward suggestions on internal quality control measures and difficulties in the implementation process.
According to the results of the previous analysis, this study believes that the quality evaluation of doctor is a complicated and complex process affected by the level of economic and social development, the development level of doctoral education, the understanding of the concept of the main body, and the objective and effective evaluation of the methods. According to the analysis and discussion, we think that the core evaluation index of the doctor's quality should include the innovative ability of the doctor at the present stage which is the most needed and the most capable of reflecting the doctor's quality. Secondly, it should include the four aspects of scientific research ability: thinking, learning, asking, and doing, that is, thinking ability, learning ability, and coordination. Competence and executive ability, as well as professional skills of PhD students in clinical disciplines.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：G643.0

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王慧娟;吳月紅;;高校研究生業(yè)務(wù)素質(zhì)綜合評價(jià)體系及其數(shù)學(xué)模型[J];安徽工程科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(自然科學(xué)版);2006年01期

2 芭芭拉·M·科姆;朱知翔;;博士生教育去向何方?——全球變化背景下歐洲的新舉措[J];北京大學(xué)教育評論;2007年04期

3 沈文欽;;博士培養(yǎng)質(zhì)量評價(jià):概念、方法與視角[J];北京大學(xué)教育評論;2009年02期

4 趙世奎;;博士培養(yǎng)質(zhì)量評價(jià)的差異性分析[J];北京大學(xué)教育評論;2009年02期

5 沈華;;博士培養(yǎng)質(zhì)量的模糊綜合評價(jià)[J];北京大學(xué)教育評論;2009年02期

6 曾志偉;張桂華;;國外研究生培養(yǎng)模式的比較分析及借鑒[J];太原師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2006年01期

7 袁本濤;趙偉;王孫禺;;我國研究生教育質(zhì)量現(xiàn)狀的調(diào)查與研究[J];高等工程教育研究;2007年04期

8 王蔚虹;;我國研究型大學(xué)師生對博士質(zhì)量現(xiàn)狀的評價(jià)——基于五所高校的調(diào)查[J];高教探索;2009年01期

9 孫沉魯;美國研究生教育及其對我國的啟示[J];廣西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2000年02期

10 孟祥璽;韓興順;冷美萍;;基于改進(jìn)AHP的研究生綜合評價(jià)體系研究[J];信息技術(shù);2009年09期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 郭煜;軍隊(duì)臨床醫(yī)學(xué)專業(yè)學(xué)位博士研究生綜合素質(zhì)評價(jià)研究[D];國防科學(xué)技術(shù)大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號：1836931