【作者】 孔寒冰；

【导师】 王沛民；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 教育经济与管理， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 工程学科分类是工程教育和科技教育管理的重大议题(theme),理想与实际的差距又使之成为一个严重问题(problem)。本文首先展现其相关背景,包括现有学科分类和实践的复杂景象、相应研究工作的欠缺和滞后,以及新世纪工程科技和工程教育的巨大变革对新的工程学科框架的迫切需要。本文分六章探讨工程学科框架的形态和性态。第1章“引言”,提出并界定了研究问题与解题思路。第2章“文献探讨”,辨析“工程”、“学科”、“专业”三个基本概念,梳理相关知识论、本体论和框架理论的理论元素,以便后续章节具体应用。第3章是框架形态研究,用第一手材料展现和分析中、美、俄、英、法、德、日、澳8个国家具有代表性的工程学科框架,是为第5章的实证研究提供可靠数据的基础。第4章是框架性态定性分析与综合,借助系统过程方式,以大量经考证的历史性资料,从工程活动、工程学科、工程知识体形成模式、工程职业、工程职能、工程过程、工程应用拓展与价值等多个侧面,挖掘出工程学科知识本体的基本元素,构筑了相应的本体模型,对其内涵和可能的应用进行了较为充分的讨论。第5章是框架性态实证研究,借助SPSS软件对被统计工程学科进行了多维标度分析(MDS)、因子分析(FA)和聚类分析(CA),给出表征框架性态的多个图谱,对可视化结果,以及所有框架全样本的主因子提取与可视化分析,并简要说明了它们的应用。第6章“结论”,总结全文主要工作,阐明创新点和研究不足,对未来研究予以展望。本文研究工作的结果表明:一、工程学科具有框架形态的多样性.各具特色的框架形态,分类层次、学科总数和学科名称不完全相同,当然各自的功用也不尽相同:三个英语国家的工程学科分类标准具有较宽的适用性,既用作统计,也供教育、研究、招生、就业等相关使用;而其他国家的分类标准则表现出应用的“专属性”,一些国家甚至在同类型应用中又有多个专门的标准。学科框架运作于不同的主客观环境,不加剪裁地照搬照抄以谋求统一框架显然并不可取。二、工程学科具有本体元素的同一性.不同学科框架具有相似的内在性态,即具有内在的知识本体元素同一性。框架性态蕴含在本体的基本概念集合中,包括与基础工程学科的同源派生关系、与数学及相关自然科学的亲缘互补关系、在功能对象领域的基本分布状态、在生命周期中的主要运作阶段、对工程科技的物质,以及能量和信息的负载状态。加上学科的结构指数,工程学科知识本体完整地表达了框架的性态和形态。三、工程学科框架的图谱给人新的认知.对12个框架1327个学科样本的多元分析与可视化,确认了工程学科体系中的设计、制造与矿业工程、物理学与电气工程、化学与化学工程、土木工程、生物学、数学的显著地位和作用;机械工程和力学是工程知识本体中最具普遍性的要素,对其他工程学科起着一种基础作用;工业工程在传统框架中处于弱势地位,大力发展与之关联的生产、经营和工程服务类的学科应成为新建框架的重要考虑。框架间的根本差异主要是在生产、经营、生命和生态等功能领域的不同侧重,以及对科学依赖或技术依赖的倾向性。四、工程学科框架的全貌得以清楚展现.由于直接采用原始资料,译词反复求证、认真校订,尽可能避免了国外信息的以讹传讹和先入为主。对全球代表性国家的典型学科分类的相对客观清晰的描述,展现了生动而丰富多彩的工程学科面貌,为今后的相关研究提供了可靠的资讯基础。五、学科、专业和工程概念得到进一步甄别.本文初步辨析和厘定了它们的内涵、区别与联系。除了给出“工程”的知识、活动和专业的三重定义外,本文还阐释了“学科”不是科学的专属品,科学以外的学问也可以有自己的学科;“专业”(profession)以及专业界、专业人才、专业领域、专业教育、专业资格论证等等术语中的“专业”,都是专门职业的意思,中国大学里的“专业”(相当于program)则是专门学业的意思。三个术语的内涵虽有重大区别,但可借助它们的知识定义和专业(组织)定义紧密联系。21世纪工程和工程教育的发展呼唤新的工程学科框架,以解放和促进工程科技生产力。加强工程学科知识系统的核心成分,调整学科结构,开辟新的领域,发展工程服务等等,均是构建新框架的重要途径。作为重要的理论主张,本文提出用“工程链”统合工程的过程链与价值链,对它的创新实践将创造一个“大E”的工程。更多还原

【Abstract】 The classification of Engineering Discipline is an important theme of engineering education and scientific & technological education management, while the gap between the ideal and the reality makes it a serious problem. This paper presents the background of the issue, which includes the complex situation of the discipline classification and the actual practice, the deficiency and lag of the corresponding study, and the urgent demand for a brand-new engineering discipline framework based on the great transformation of the science, technology and engineering education in the new century.The paper probes into the configuration and the character of the engineering discipline framework (EDF) in 6 chapters. And this study based on ontology has follow outcomes.I. The Diversity of the Framework Configuration for Engineering Discipline.The classification structures, the total subjects number and the subjects appellations of different framework configurations with special features are not completely the same, therefore, their alleged functions could not be exactly identical: the classification criterion of the three English-speaking countries for engineering discipline has a broader applicability which hold true for the fields of education, research, students recruiting, and employment; while the classification criterion of the other countries manifests a kind of "exclusion" in application, and in some countries, there are even more than one special criterion in the same application type.II. The Identification of the Ontology Elements for Engineering Discipline.Different discipline frameworks have similar inner characters, including the homologous derivation relationship with the fundamental engineering discipline, the affinity complementary relationship with mathematics and the correlated natural sciences, the basic distribution state in the functional object field, the major operation phase in the life cycle and the load status of the materials, energy and information of the engineering. Together with the structure index of the discipline, the knowledge ontology of the engineering discipline fully presents the configuration and the character of the EDF.III. The New Cognition from the Maps of the EDF.The visualization and the multivariate analysis toward 12 frameworks and 1,327 discipline samples confirms the outstanding status and function of the design, manufacturing and mining engineering, physics and electrical engineering, chemistry and chemical engineering, biology and mathematics in the engineering discipline system. The mechanical engineering and mechanics are the most prevailing elements in the engineering knowledge ontology, which provide a fundamental function for other engineering disciplines. The industrial engineering is in a weak status in the traditional framework, therefore, to vigorously facilitate the development of the relative disciplines of management, marketing and engineering service should be attached with serious consideration. The fundamental diversity between frameworks lies in the different emphasis in the functional fields of production, management, life and ecology, and the tendency toward science dependence and technology dependence as well.IV. The Crystal Presentation of the Diversiform EDFs.Based on the original data, the paper successfully avoids the problems of erroneous information relaying and first impressions being strongest by repeated checks of the translation. The objective and vivid description of the typical discipline classification of the representative nations globally in the paper provides an authentic information base for further research in the related fields.V. A Further Recognition of the Concepts of Discipline, Profession and Engineering.The paper provides a preliminary analysis and redefinition of the connotations, differences and connections of the three concepts. In addition to the three definitions of "engineering" from the perspectives of knowledge, activity and profession, the paper also illustrates that, "discipline" is not the exclusive belongings to science, on the contrary, learnings other than science could also own their unique disciplines. "Profession" as well as the "profession" in the terms such as professional boundaries, professionals, professional fields, professional educations, professional qualification demonstration all imply the idea of specialized career, while the "profession" (similar to "program") in Chinese universities contains the idea of specialized academic study. Grave differences as exist, the three concepts could still be tightly linked by means of their knowledge definition and profession (organization) definition.The development of engineering and engineering education in the 21st century calls for a new EDF so as to liberate and facilitate the scientific and technological productive forces of engineering. All these are the major means to construct a new framework: to enhance the core part of the knowledge system of the engineering discipline, to adjust the discipline structure, and to cultivate new fields. The paper proposes to unify the process chain and the value chain, and on top of which, "engineering with a big E" would be built through the continuous practice更多还原