中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2021, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (5): 613-620. doi: 10.11946/cjstp.202102020108

• 论坛 • 上一篇    下一篇

培育世界一流科技期刊背景下高校学报的发展建议——基于高质量科技期刊分级目录分析

秦明阳(), 伍锦花(), 陈灿华, 赵俊, 杨幼平   

  1. 中南大学《中南大学学报(自然科学版)》编辑部,湖南省长沙市麓山南路932号 410083
  • 收稿日期:2021-02-02 修回日期:2021-02-19 出版日期:2021-05-15 发布日期:2021-05-15
  • 通讯作者: 伍锦花 E-mail:qinmingyang503@csu.edu.cn;wujinhua2468@163.com
  • 作者简介:秦明阳(ORCID:0000-0001-9443-259X),博士,编辑,E-mail: qinmingyang503@csu.edu.cn;|陈灿华,硕士,编审,编辑部主任;|赵 俊,硕士,副编审,编辑部副主任;|杨幼平,硕士,副编审。
  • 基金资助:
    中国科技期刊卓越行动计划(C-194)

Suggestions for university journals under the background of developing world-class scienpngic journals: Based on the analysis of China High-Quality Scienpngic Journal Rating Guide

QIN Mingyang(), WU Jinhua(), CHEN Canhua, ZHAO Jun, YANG Youping   

  1. Editorial Office of Journal of Central South University (Science and Technology), Central South University, 932 South Lushan Road, Changsha 410083, China
  • Received:2021-02-02 Revised:2021-02-19 Online:2021-05-15 Published:2021-05-15
  • Contact: WU Jinhua E-mail:qinmingyang503@csu.edu.cn;wujinhua2468@163.com

摘要:

【目的】 分领域高质量科技期刊分级目录不断出炉,讨论高校学报在新时期面临的挑战,提出高校学报未来发展建议。【方法】 查询中国科协已公布的分领域高质量科技期刊名单,筛选出高校学报名单并分析其表现特征,基于高校学报自身特征和现状,深入探讨原因并提出高校学报未来发展建议。【结果】 入选分级目录的高校学报数量不多,且在分级目录中所占比例较低,多属于T2和T3级,整体表现不佳。高校学报的综合性不符合“专业化”的潮流,学术性不能做到“术业有专攻”,且不够积极主动申请分级目录。【结论】 为了迎接分级目录带来的新挑战,高校学报需要弱化综合性,凝聚学科发文范围;强化学术性,加速专业化进程;打破内向性,提升期刊影响力。

关键词: 高校学报, 世界一流科技期刊, 新挑战, 分级目录, 发展建议

Abstract:

[Purposes] Against the backdrop of high-quality scienpngic journal rating, challenges for university journals were discussed and suggestions for their development were put forward. [Methods] From the China High-Quality Scienpngic Journal Rating Guide (hereinafter referred to as the Rating Guide) published by China Association for Science and Technology, university journals were screened out, and their characteristics and current situation were analyzed. On this basis, the reasons for the small number and proportion of them in the Rating Guide were comprehensively analyzed and suggestions for their development were proposed. [Findings] University journals see a small number and small proportion in the Rating Guide and most of them belong to the T2 and T3 categories. The reasons are as follows: failing to limit disciplines, no priority, and lacking initiative for applying to be included in the Rating Guide. [Conclusions] Facing new challenges brought by the rating of journals, university journals should appropriately narrow their scope, emphasize the development of priority and characteristic disciplines, and break with the tradition and attract external high-quality papers to enhance the impact.

Key words: University journal, World-class scienpngic journal, New challenge, Rating guide, Suggestion