高校教师绩效评估中的“软标准”与“硬程序”

为了奖惩和激励成员，所有组织机构都需要评估成员绩效。研究型的使命是创造、传递和运用最新知识。鉴于新知的量和质都难以确认和预判，对研究型教师绩效的评估，不能依赖事先确定的计件量、质的硬标准，而必须给予评估人事后裁量的空间，也就是实施软标准。为了减少个人恩怨、官员专断和腐败行为的影响，提升评估的公平度和公信度，软标准必须配以硬程序。大学教师绩效评估须有校内校外同行专家的实权参与，须有多个相互监督和制衡的委员会实施实质集体决策，其步骤细节须明确规定、形成文字。程序的制定须有教师集体的正式和广泛地参与。评估程序应当是大学规章制度的核心部分，绩效评估中背离规定程序的行为应受严厉惩戒。

This paper observes that research universities’ missions are all about knowledge. Research is to create knowledge. Teaching is to impart knowledge. Service is to apply knowledge. Knowledge differs from many other products in that the criteria for judging its quantity or quality can rarely be agreed upon universally, even less predetermined. Consequently, pre-establishing concreate and quantitative requirements for faculty performance encourages just enough efforts to just meet the requirement, and discourages creativity and risk-taking for excellence. The author suggests research universities should pose broad and flexible requirement that empowers experts as the final judges of overall excellence. To minimize the possible influences of personal interests, administrative interferences, and corruptive quid pro quo, so as to establish the legitimacy of and the confidence in the evaluation, the "soft" criteria need to be administered through prescribed procedures that feature substantive and collective decisions by peers from inside and outside of an institution. Such procedures need to be decided with the full and substantive participation by the larger faculty, and written in details. The integrity of the appointment and promotion reviews should be protected as the life line of a university. Deviations from prescribed procedures of the reviews should be considered corruptions of the highest order.