The first round of evaluation was conducted in three times in 2002-2004 (each time some disciplines were evaluated), and a total of 1366 disciplines from 229 units participated in the evaluation.
The second round of evaluation was conducted twice in 2006-2008, and 2369 subjects from 33 1 unit participated in the evaluation.
The third round of evaluation was conducted in 20 12, and a total of 4235 subjects from * * * 39 1 unit participated in the evaluation.
The fourth round of national discipline assessment was launched in April 2006. According to the principle of "voluntary application and free participation", the method of "combining objective evaluation with subjective evaluation" is adopted. The evaluation system has made many innovations on the basis of the first three rounds; The evaluation data is obtained in the way of "combining public data with unit declaration"; The evaluation results are presented in a "hierarchical" way.
The specific method is to announce the top 70% subjects in nine grades according to the percentile of the overall score of subjects: the top 2% (or the top 2) is A+, 2% ~ 5% is A (excluding 2%, the same below), and 5% ~ 10% is A- 10.
The fifth round of discipline evaluation includes two major initiatives:
First, strengthen the position of talent training center, such as strengthening the evaluation of students' quality combining learning quality with graduation quality: learning quality highlights the comprehensive representative achievements of students' "morality, intelligence, physique and art" and pays attention to students' participation and contribution; Graduation quality adheres to the combination of overall employment quality and career development quality, and pays attention to employer evaluation.
Second, resolutely get rid of the stubborn disease of "five talents". For example, teachers should be evaluated not only by their academic qualifications and professional titles, but also by setting talent "hat" indicators, so as to avoid the practice of unilaterally evaluating academic level by professional titles. Evaluation of scientific research level is not limited to papers and awards, and indicators such as "representative academic works", "patent transformation" and "new drug research and development" are set to evaluate scientific research effectiveness in multiple dimensions.