The talent "hat" discussed in the scientific and technological circles mainly refers to talent plans and scientific research projects funded by talents. The purpose of the talent plan is to care, select and support talents, and scientific research projects are to provide scientific research funding for outstanding scientific and technological talents, play a role in training and motivating, these policies have played an irreplaceable and important role in the construction of the mainland scientific and technological talent team, and a large number of outstanding scientists have emerged in various talent plans.
However, some talent plans and projects are given too many benefits attached in the process of use, which is not related to their policy purpose and positioning, which distorts the original policy intention. Many young researchers feel that "hats are flying all over the sky", which has become one of the stubborn diseases that make it difficult for researchers to concentrate on scientific research; "Stepping on the hat of a little competition" breaks the rhythm of the natural growth of some young researchers and becomes an "unreasonable burden"... Liu Yun, a professor at the School of Public Policy and Management of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, believes that the original intention of the establishment of the talent title met the needs of the time, and the current problem appeared in the "alienated use".
The "Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Project Evaluation, Talent Evaluation and Institutional Evaluation" issued by the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council in 2018, in view of the prominent problems such as "too many hats" for talents, "one-size-fits-all" standards, and disjointed evaluation, proposed that the honorary title of talent should not be regarded as a restrictive condition for undertaking various national science and technology plan projects, obtaining national science and technology awards, professional title evaluation, job recruitment, and salary and treatment, so that the talent title can return to the academic and honorary essence, and avoid simple and direct linkage with material interests; Strengthen the status of employers as the main body of talent evaluation, not simply determine salary and treatment by academic titles and talent titles, and allocate academic resources...
In recent years, relevant departments have also successively introduced a series of reform measures to clean up the "hat" of talents. In 2020, the Ministry of Education issued Several Opinions on Correctly Understanding and Standardizing the Use of College Talent Titles, which mentioned that teaching evaluation and subject evaluation should adhere to the comprehensive evaluation of the quality of the teaching team, do not take the title and quantity of talents as the direct basis for evaluation, and reduce the direct link between evaluation results and academic resource allocation. In the same year, the Ministry of Science and Technology and other four departments issued the "Notice on Continuing to Carry out Special Actions to Reduce the Burden of Scientific Researchers and Stimulate Innovation Vitality", which mentioned that the use of talent "hats" as evaluation indicators in science and technology evaluation activities should be cleaned up and standardized, and the problems of talent "hats" directly linked to material interests.
For example, the Ministry of Science and Technology has carried out the clean-up of the practice of using talent "hats" as evaluation indicators, and canceled the entry for filling in the title of talents in the evaluation of national science and technology plan projects. The fifth round of subject evaluation work plan of the Ministry of Education proposes that the evaluation of teachers should not only be academic qualifications and professional titles, but also do not set talent "hat" indicators, and avoid the practice of unilaterally evaluating academic level by academic titles. In Liu Yun's view, at present, "breaking the four only" has made phased progress, but the "historical inertia" of the "hat-only" problem of employers, especially some colleges and universities, still exists in attracting and employing people.
Why is the "hat" still flying? Recently, a reporter from China Youth Daily and China Youth Network conducted a front-line investigation on the alienation of the use of talent titles.
Some "hats" have become "iron absorbers" for resource allocation
Young researcher Wen Wu used the "Matthew effect of resources" to describe the impact of "hats" on the allocation of scientific and technological resources. A researcher who has participated in the project review work said that although the requirements for not "hat-only" have been clarified in the rules for the evaluation of science and technology projects, there are still differences in the evaluation results of experts, and "it is easier to undertake large projects after having "hats".
Wen Wu, 36, is a research assistant. Since 2019, he has applied for a science fund project for four consecutive years, but failed. Because he does not have his own projects and funds, he derides himself as a "scientific migrant worker", and "70% to 80% of the young people around me are [this feeling], maybe even wider."
"Young people, if they can't get the 'hat', all aspects of development will be affected. With a 'hat', titles, salaries, and resource allocations will all be tilted towards him. Liu Yun said.
A researcher on science and technology evaluation policy, who did not want to be named, analyzed that the reason why scientific research institutions are willing to provide various special preferential policies to hire "hat talents" is because "as long as this person is introduced, it is equivalent to introducing the resources behind him", and the projects and funds they can bring can often play a key role in the scientific research unit standing out in the assessment and evaluation of superiors. The introduction of "hat talents" is actually the introduction of a "chip" to compete for rankings and resources. In order to get more support from superiors, most scientific research units either take the initiative or are forced to participate in the "robbery war".
Some researchers reported that the phenomenon of "robbing people" is more common in colleges and universities. Although the policy clearly requires that the number and level of "hats" no longer be filled in in evaluation activities such as subject evaluation, when talking about the landmark projects, landmark awards, and representative works filled in in the current subject evaluation, a director of the science and technology division of a southern university frankly said that he still believes that "hat talents" should have a "higher probability of obtaining" and that "the ability to obtain resources must be valued by schools".
Some people believe that the inertia of "hat-only" is also related to the excessive voice of "hat talents". "Ability to access resources" is often sought after. Li Li, who is engaged in research related to science and technology policy in a university in Beijing, said that after obtaining the "hat", it is easier to become the person who evaluates the "hat", resulting in scientific research resources being stranded in the "hat" circle.
"Hats" can continue to attract more resources like "magnets", which also forms the "Matthew effect" mentioned by Wen Wu - so that researchers have more scientific research resources, and correspondingly, less is less.
The policy researchers, who did not want to be named, believe that the emergence of "hats flying in the sky" is largely related to the government's criteria for judging and using outstanding talent. Due to the relative lack of academic evaluation, market evaluation and other credible talent evaluation channels, the support object of talent plans and talent science and technology projects set up by the state, the so-called "hat talents", has become an important yardstick for governments at all levels to judge whether a person is an excellent talent, and the allocation of scientific and technological resources and policy support are tilted towards them, which leads to excessive accumulation of resources to "hat talents", making them "iron absorbers" of resources, thereby aggravating the resource gap between "hat talents" and non-"hat talents" and aggravating Chasing hats, robbing hats" ethos.
He analyzed that in this environment, "hats" have become academic workplace "passes", to some extent strangling the channel of academic growth of young talents, young people want to be motivated, they have to "step on the hat", and "produce results as soon as possible" and "do some short and fast topics as soon as possible" before applying for various "hats" before the age limit node of applying for various "hats", which will bring unreasonable declaration pressure and burden. This is obviously not conducive to scientific researchers to concentrate on research and overcome difficulties, and does not meet the development needs of high-level scientific and technological self-reliance and self-improvement.
Some "hats" have become academic workplace "passes"
Young professor Wang Feng joined a university in 2021, and his career development is "very smooth", and he believes that "getting a 'hat' as soon as I return to China" has played a key role in it. He said that half a year after receiving the "hat" of a national talent, he was rated as a professor from an assistant researcher through the "green channel".
After Wang Feng joined a domestic university, he judged that "having a title can better develop", and carefully prepared an application for "several months".
While waiting, he saw people posting on social media one after another to announce the news, and Wang Feng once thought that he was "hanging". He was frustrated - "Without [hats], it would be difficult to apply for projects and evaluate titles." More importantly, he believes that if one year is not evaluated, the next year "again" will take a considerable amount of time and energy. So after receiving the news that he had "rated", he was relieved.
Li Qingshan, a 37-year-old associate professor at a university in Beijing, was full of admiration and envy when he heard this story. He has continuously applied for many years of national fund projects and a national high-level talent support plan. The age limit for men in these two declarations is 38 and 40 years old, respectively, and apparently, there is not much time left for him to "fight for hats".
Li Qingshan learned that in the colleges and universities where he works, with a "hat", he can be "directly recognized" as a high-level talent, and he who has not yet obtained the "hat" can only be selected into the lower-level talent plan of his unit. Compared with a person with a "hat", in addition to feeling "no status", he also has a "multiplied difference" in treatment.
In his view, the "hat" is like a "pass" for the academic workplace. If you don't step on the dots to get all kinds of "hats", then the rising channel of the academic workplace is difficult to open.
Wei Shijie and Zhang Wenxia, researchers of the China Academy of Science and Technology Development Strategy, mentioned in the analysis article "National Scientific Research Institutions Support Young Researchers to Concentrate on Research, Exploration, Problems and Policy Suggestions" that at present, the mainland's science and technology plan projects, talent plans, science and technology awards, etc. to some extent have formed a road that needs to "fight monsters and upgrade", and young scientific researchers must open up level by level, so that the road of scientific research can go smoothly. If a young researcher fails to achieve a high starting point in the early stage of his career (that is, get a high-level talent "hat"), it is difficult to achieve "turning over" in the subsequent career, so young researchers must participate in fierce resource competition from the beginning, and it is difficult to grow slowly in their own way and pace under the huge pressure and anxiety of involution.
Li Qingshan believes that "hats" can "screen" out some excellent people, but "it is not normal for everyone to compete for hats."
Liu Yun analyzed that it is precisely because the existence of "hats" will bring great differences to the development of scientific researchers in all aspects, and many young people still think that "hats" are worth fighting for. But in fact, compared with the huge group of young researchers, the number of talent "hats" is very limited, "more monks and less porridge", and everyone wants to compete, which eventually leads to the rhythm of "chasing hats" "disrupting the natural growth law of talents".
The ruler of the evaluation of diverse talents should be "hardened"
Liu Yun believes that the alienated use of the title of talent is a manifestation that the talent work and scientific research management concepts have not kept pace with the development of the times, and relevant policies need to be adjusted. The government can give commendations to scientific and technological talents who have made outstanding contributions, but the matter of giving academic honors to researchers should be entrusted to the academic community. He said that employers should assume the responsibility of selecting and employing people, and should not use "hats" as the only criterion for measuring talents.
Li Qingshan believes that in order to make the ruler of the "hat" appear less effective, other talents need to evaluate the "ruler" to be hardened.
He observed some positive changes, such as some units have begun to try reform, broaden the talent evaluation channels, social services, teaching achievements, scientific and technological achievements transformation, etc. are also included in the talent evaluation system, but in the implementation, these evaluation channels have not been widely recognized as "hats". Taking his own research field air pollution as an example, the proportion of social science and technology services is very large, "Since the beginning of this year, I have served five or six steel mills, more than a dozen coking plants, and more than a dozen brick factories", but due to the current lack of a mature system for evaluating the effects of scientific and technological services, his work results are not a good proof of ability, let alone to obtain career promotion opportunities or more scientific research resources.
How to make the "ruler" of other evaluations hardened, some experts suggest increasing evaluation channels, giving full play to the role of academic communities and industry associations, and establishing a pluralistic evaluation system other than the government evaluation system. Some researchers have suggested that project review should increase the proportion of non-"hat talent" review experts.
At the same time, Liu Yun suggested that the function of the honorary title of national talent should be adjusted to commend those who have made outstanding contributions, and can "select a few every year" to play the role of "role model". He also suggested that the state's talent research projects targeting young personnel should avoid the label of "national name", so as not to be mistaken by society and employers as "talent hats".
Li Li believes that significantly reducing the number of "hats" may be used as a "palliative" choice, so that most young people may be able to do things "with peace of mind" and return to their original academic intention; Through the adjustment of the evaluation system, diluting or even canceling the "added value" corresponding to talent plans and scientific research projects is the "cure" way to solve the "hat-only" problem.
(Wang Feng, Li Qingshan, Wen Wu, Li Li are pseudonyms)