"Where has all the time gone?" What is holding young researchers' attention to time? "
The General Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council recently issued several measures to further strengthen the training and utilization of young scientific and technological talents.
"Where has all the time gone?" has become a hot topic among researchers, and many academicians and experts have called for a resolute end to wasting precious research time on welcoming and responding to situations. Participating in platform and situational work is one of the prominent problems that troubles scientific researchers.
Achieving self-reliance in high-level science and technology is the key to Chinese path to modernization. How to continuously reduce the unnecessary burden on researchers and make them spend their time on the cutting edge has become a highly anticipated topic. Recently, the General Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Several Measures on Further Strengthening the Training and Use of Young Science and Technology Talents", which requires reducing the non scientific research burden of young science and technology talents, "more than 80% of work time per week is used for scientific research and academic activities," and "ensuring the scientific research time of young science and technology talents is included in unit assessments.".
Previously, from 2018 to 2022, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Education, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the National Natural Science Foundation of China and other five departments launched three consecutive rounds of "burden reduction special actions" for scientific researchers. Action 1.0 to Reduce Burden deploys 7 actions, including reducing expenses, resolving reimbursement issues, and cleaning up issues related to only academic papers, professional titles, academic qualifications, and awards; Action 2.0 to Consolidate Early Work, Adjust Focus, Promote Reduction of Grassroots Reporting Workload, Strengthen Support and Incentives for Scientific Researchers, etc; Action 3.0 will focus on "youth" and carry out five actions, including taking on major responsibilities, increasing opportunities, reducing assessments, ensuring time, and strengthening physical fitness. It is proposed to "ensure that young full-time scientific researchers spend no less than 4/5 of their working days on scientific research.".
In February 2023, the preliminary results of the survey questionnaire on the implementation of reducing the burden on young researchers conducted by the Ministry of Science and Technology showed that nearly 60% of surveyed researchers felt the effect of this action in reducing the unnecessary burden on young researchers. However, the investigation also found that safeguarding the scientific research time of young people is still a daunting task.
Liu Hui, Deputy Researcher of the Science and Technology Talent Exchange and Development Service Center of the Ministry of Science and Technology, has participated in the research, drafting, and tracking evaluation of the implementation of the series of documents on reducing burdens. He introduced that through evaluation, it was found that all three rounds of load reduction actions were widely welcomed by researchers. The questionnaire survey shows that the burden reduction action has significantly benefited most researchers, and nearly 60% of the surveyed researchers believe that the overall research burden has been reduced, especially some urgent issues such as excessive forms and reimbursement have been effectively resolved. However, the burden faced by young researchers is influenced by various factors, which goes beyond the scientific and technological management work itself and is complex. Some young researchers have reported that there are still phenomena such as "fragmented research time" and "being whipped away for scientific research", and some unreasonable burdens point to deep-seated problems.
Where has the time for young researchers gone?
Some are trapped in a passive cycle of service assessment
As a young scientist who has just started his career, Liu Fang, the head of a computer laboratory and doctoral supervisor at a university in the south, has published an average of one paper per month in the past two years, and has little time to delve into real scientific research.
She told reporters that for the sake of fairness and balance, her college has developed a very complex score conversion system. Papers, projects, etc. will be converted into scores, and the scores will ultimately be used to evaluate the annual work performance of teachers. The ranking of this score each year is linked to the allocation of doctoral enrollment quotas in the following year.
"Where evaluation is oriented, time flows." said Wang Yi, a research intern working in Beijing. His unit has clear requirements for the annual average project funding of scientific researchers, and whether the figures meet the standards is linked to their salaries. Therefore, he spends about 60% of his time on repetitive scientific research product production projects every year, lacking time for innovative research.
The issue of time points to evaluation indicators. Should assessment serve scientific research or scientific research serve assessment? How to combine the two?
Li Li, who is engaged in science and technology policy research at a certain university in Beijing, believes that many young scholars seem to be trapped in a "dead cycle" of being assessed - the more busy they are dealing with assessments, the less they can devote a large amount of time to research, and the more difficult it is to solve the "bottleneck" problem. They can only be busy and constantly revolving around the "rules".
Liu Hui candidly stated that during the research, there was a discussion about the obstacles of devoting oneself to research, and researchers had a relatively concentrated response to issues related to assessment and evaluation. This included some scientific research units having too frequent and complex evaluations, and young researchers having to "rush to work and gather results" to cope with performance evaluations; Some universities, when implementing the "either promotion or departure" system, have changed the annual assessment target of publishing two high-level articles per year to a 3-year and 7-article appointment period assessment target. The assessment period has been extended, but the workload has actually increased.
Liu Fang admitted that in the past two years, she has only been satisfied with about two papers per year. Although she herself "hopes to only produce the best results," many people still choose "short and fast" topics to stand out in the assessment. How to allocate time and energy, specifically for every young researcher, is a very complex trade-off.
Evaluation commands the direction of time. In the eyes of many people, to solve the problem of time, it is necessary to start from the prescription of evaluation.
In fact, the newly revised Law of the People's Republic of China on Science and Technology Progress has legally clarified the requirements for implementing classified evaluation based on the quality, contribution, and performance of scientific and technological innovation. In March 2023, experts from the Science and Technology Evaluation Center of the Ministry of Science and Technology, including Tian Delu, published a study titled "Reflections on Promoting the Implementation of Science and Technology Evaluation Reform", which showed that the thinking mode of valuing achievement quality has basically formed a social consensus.
At the same time, reporters found through research that although many researchers are familiar with breaking the "four only", they still have confusion about the practical operation of "setting new standards". What kind of evaluation reform operation can truly guide research time towards high-level technological innovation?
The reporter learned that Peking University, the Institute of Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and other institutions are gradually breaking the quantitative assessment method. The head of relevant departments at Peking University stated that while it is good to publish papers in authoritative journals such as Nature and Science, what is more important is the actual weight of the research content. If it is a major theoretical breakthrough or solving key technical problems, even if it is not published in the top journal, it will still be very helpful for professional title evaluation. The relevant person in charge of the Institute of Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences introduced that the talent cap and project funding level of the unit are not linked to the professional title evaluation and salary, and the evaluation of talents depends on the "systematicness" and "originality" of their research.
In these units, it is often seen that researchers' time flows towards major research topics, and they can sharpen their swords for years, ushering in a "big explosion" after a "long silence". The implementation of new standards in these areas may depend on the simultaneous linkage of policies in research planning, personnel evaluation, financial compensation, and other aspects in the evaluation and reform plan; Or it may depend on the injection of a certain scale of "funds"; Alternatively, relying on "long-term" and "focused" scientific research accumulation, units can organize a scientific community with their own evaluation capabilities in relevant fields for evaluation, no longer relying solely on existing evaluation systems such as papers to evaluate individuals.
On the other hand, for many units, the lack of these reform conditions is also a bottleneck for time to flow towards major innovative research. This coincides with some of the conclusions of the study of "Thinking". The study points out that the current working mechanism for cross departmental joint promotion of reform in scientific research evaluation is not yet sound; Some units have limitations in their development stage and ability level, and still need to reflect their workload and work level through quantity.
Aiming at these "targets", this study suggests clarifying the division of responsibilities among departments, localities, and research units, and forming a collaborative mechanism and responsibility implementation mechanism that is linked up and down, coordinated left and right, and graded. At the same time, it is suggested to strengthen the sense of responsibility and responsibility of multiple evaluation subjects, enhance the discourse power of the scientific community in academic evaluation, and fully leverage the substantive role of the scientific community in the establishment of disciplinary evaluation norms, academic standard formulation, academic evaluation process, and the construction of a responsible evaluation environment.
Some are involved in the excessive competition of "reporting every project"
Some troubles
Wang Shuai, a young backbone researcher at a research institute in Beijing, has served as the leader of several projects. He introduced that the unit requires each scientific researcher to receive an average annual project funding of millions of yuan, and "our department receives almost all competitive funding.". He told reporters from China Youth Daily and China Youth Network that he spends about 50% to 60% of his time every year on contract coordination, financial processes, and other affairs related to these competitive projects.
Some researchers believe that competition is necessary, but excessive competition can cause impatience and affect the time and energy required to focus on scientific research.
Zhang Jun, the leader of Wang Shuai, said that although relying on the State Key Laboratory to carry out work, the financial allocation is limited, and most of the annual scientific research funds must be obtained through competition. "It is not just to get a project and do it well", but to keep taking projects, otherwise it will affect survival and development. When participating in bidding and competition for some projects, he felt that excessive competition had caused unnecessary "internal competition". "Now the bidding is too competitive! We wrote 200 pages of a 10 million yuan project bid, and others even said that our attitude was not serious.". Zhang Jun believes that the number of pages in the bidding document may not be directly proportional to the level of the team, but it also requires a lot of effort to prepare and consumes a lot of time from researchers.
Some young researchers also mentioned that the multi project application system is "too complex", and the atmosphere of "reporting every project" is anxiety inducing, making it difficult to calm down and "start from the heart" to truly tackle the scientific research challenges.
Liu Fang was fortunate to have set up her own laboratory as soon as she returned to China. In order to alleviate the "crisis" of the research team's monthly salary expenditure of over 100000 yuan, she stated that "almost any funding needs to be applied for" - in the past three years, she has applied for dozens of projects and successfully obtained 11.
Liu Fang attempted to explain the application logic of the project, "For example, there are national, provincial, municipal and other levels of funds, and each level of fund includes team projects, youth projects, general projects, key projects, talent projects, and other types..." "Talent projects are divided into different types from national, provincial, and municipal levels, and the application time period, application method, and focus of each type of hat are different," but it seems difficult to explain clearly. ".
Liu Hui learned that seeking funding for projects does indeed involve a significant amount of time and energy from young researchers. He said that from the various aspects reflected in the research and evaluation, this points to the deep-seated problem of scientific research resource allocation - the coexistence of insufficient stable funding and excessive competition.
This is similar to the research conclusion of "Thinking" - the current evaluation activities such as projects and rewards have obvious problems of cross repetition and low efficiency; Most researchers receive research funding from competitive project projects, and the support period is relatively short, which is not conducive to team formation and the formation of a fixed team for long-term development.
Liu Fang proposed that moderate competition is "benign", and she called for competition to have a "degree".
Wang Shuai hopes that this "degree" can be set based on the "food and clothing line" of scientific research, in order to prevent researchers from seriously affecting their time focused on scientific research due to funding constraints. "For example, it can be considered that half of the funding comes from stable support and half comes from competitive channels.".
Liu Hui understands that with the support of the Load Reduction Action 3.0 and related policies, some places have strengthened non competitive project support for young researchers. For example, Zhejiang Province encourages universities to provide non competitive funding support for new doctoral students and postdoctoral fellows for no less than 5 years. The proportion of basic research business expenses in provincial universities supporting young researchers exceeds 50%. West Lake University optimizes the "people-oriented" funding model, providing young researchers with sufficient start-up funds and sufficient financial autonomy. Zhejiang University of Technology will allocate 70% of its basic research business expenses to establish a youth research project, and set up academic activity projects in the discipline construction funds to support young scientific and technological personnel in carrying out research projects, academic exchanges, and other activities.
The Reflection also suggests strengthening the top-level design of performance evaluation in scientific research institutions, establishing and improving a resource allocation system that combines medium - and long-term evaluation with stable support, and emphasizing the long-term cultivation and team accumulation of young scientific and technological talents. It is also recommended to appropriately extend the evaluation cycle of national level project rewards. The questionnaire survey of this study shows that for national level science and technology research and development projects, respondents believe that the appropriate support period is mainly concentrated in "3-5 years" and "5-10 years".
Some are consumed in layers of intensified scientific research management
In the view of some technology workers, scientific research needs to be classified and refined according to the characteristics of the field, and a "one size fits all" approach can easily breed formalism, affecting researchers to spend their time on the cutting edge.
Zhang Jun believes that there are some formalistic details added in scientific research management in order to avoid responsibility. For example, in third-party audits and extended audits, in addition to necessary policy requirements, additional supporting materials are also required, such as requiring suppliers to provide proof of the value of purchased components. When suppliers cooperate, it is okay. Sometimes, if suppliers do not cooperate, researchers need to spend time finding more other suppliers to provide quotations as a reference. In some countries, experimental projects require researchers to take photos and annotate information such as time and weather every day during experiments, in order to "prove that they have truly worked on this day" for inspection during acceptance. Such work greatly increases the non scientific workload of researchers.
When it comes to the negative impact of some management details on research time, a young researcher admitted that researchers are afraid of "tinkering". He believes that phenomena such as modifying a report template multiple times essentially reflect unclear management goals and limited management level. He realized that taking the management of basic research projects by the Natural Science Foundation of China as an example, scientific research management should conform to the characteristics of different types of scientific research work.
A person in charge of a State Key Laboratory interviewed said that scientific research management needs to "start from the front-line needs", and scientific research is also needed for the reform of scientific research management process. Formalism and bureaucracy are not acceptable.
Liu Hui saw in the evaluation that the series of actions to reduce workload has broken through the red tape in scientific research management, especially in reducing forms and solving the problem of reimbursement, which has basically reduced everything possible and helped researchers regain a lot of research time.
In this regard, Qi Liang, a key member of a scientific research unit in Beijing, has a clear understanding. The national level project he participated in has undergone significant changes after the implementation of the burden reduction policy. He said, "At the beginning of project approval, both the report and application materials at the meeting must reflect thickness." In recent years, "old projects have caught up with new methods," and the word count requirements for project texts have been reduced. The performance template issued by the country has been greatly simplified in terms of volume, reflecting the highlights and achievements of the project while greatly reducing the time for researchers to prepare materials.
Gong Wentao, a young researcher who belongs to the same project as Qi Liang, also feels that currently, to some extent, he has freed researchers from tedious tasks such as approval, file organization, engineering negotiation, and bidding. He believes that he can invest more time in research and development.
But Qi Liang realized that further exploration is needed to improve the level of scientific research management. For example, in order to efficiently promote scientific research projects, his team has subdivided the division of labor among some existing researchers based on their own characteristics, and assigned them to the office, overall group, quality control group, application demonstration group, etc., to do research assistance work. But these people have encountered "bottlenecks" when evaluating professional titles, indicating that in order to improve management efficiency, it is necessary to link with other policies.
In the eyes of many people, reforms in talent evaluation, resource allocation, and research management have largely held the "bull's nose" of young researchers.
The latest released "Several Measures on Further Strengthening the Training and Use of Young Science and Technology Talents" proposes to continuously promote the action of reducing the burden on young science and technology talents. Science and technology project management adheres to result oriented and simplified processes. Higher education institutions and research institutes should improve the system of research assistants, effectively implement relevant regulations on research project and fund management, avoid adding layers of complexity in form filling and research fund reimbursement, continuously improve the level of information services, and improve work efficiency. Reduce the transactional work of young scientific and technological talents outside of their personal research business, eliminate unnecessary social activities, and ensure that young scientific and technological talents in research positions participate in non academic transactional activities no more than one day per week.
