Science 报道丘成桐指控北大引进人才中的问题！------ 再说丘成桐
讓丘成桐們批評來得更猛烈些吧！----Science 报道丘成桐指控北大引进人才中的问题丘成桐教授之所以现在“有问题”，一则是他批评北大，批评中国大学现行体制，批评中国现行中学数学教育体制，涉嫌与田刚与北大数学中心与北京国际数学家大会的\"个人恩怨\"，一则是他因为庞加莱猜想的证明，以及《纽约客》杂志、《科学时报》的报道所引发的舆论，许多人在为丘成桐教授的批评欢呼的同时，不禁心下惴惴，因为《纽约客》的影响太大了，结果到底如何呢？
科学界的问题最终还要由自己来解决，国际顶级期刊Science这次重磅出击，直接把《纽约客》这些小报以及田刚们打回原形！！
2006年9月22日出版的美国《科学》杂志第5794期的焦点新闻介绍了丘成桐指控北大引进人才中的问题，其中也有田刚的情况。
有位明显反丘保田的“白字秀才”在虹桥论坛贴出这篇报道，此人担心“Science 这样的报道，对田刚在美国职位肯定有否面影响。”（白字秀才 09/28 03:01）
下面是《科学》杂志的报道：
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Science 22 September 2006:
Vol. 313. no. 5794, pp. 1721 - 1723
DOI: 10.1126/science.313.5794.1721
Prev | Table of Contents | Next
News Focus
SCIENTIFIC WORKFORCE:
Frustrations Mount Over China's High-Priced Hunt for Trophy Professors
Hao Xin*
Chinese universities bask in the glow of top-gun scientists hired on part-time deals to share their wisdom. Critics say the money could be spent more wisely
Mathematician Gang Tian did not expect a standing-room-only crowd last week when he gave a lecture at Beijing University (Beida) on the Poincaré conjecture. But not all were there for the math. Reporters and others had come for a glimpse of the man at the center of a tempest engulfing Chinese academia. Tian is a premier example of a controversial phenomenon: a Chinese-born researcher with a full-time faculty position overseas who gets paid handsomely for short working stints in his homeland.
Resentment against part-timers boiled over last July, when Shing-Tung Yau, a Harvard University mathematician and Tian's former mentor, dismissed the \"majority\" of Beida's overseas recruits as \"jiade,\" or \"fakes,\" in comments in the Chinese magazine Nanfang Renwu Zhoukan. Beida officials fired off a series of rebuttals in which they termed Yau's remarks \"irresponsible\" and a \"distortion of facts\" and rattled off achievements--papers in prestigious journals and patents, for instance--by talent returned from overseas.
The university's attempts at damage control, however, only intensified debate about professors such as Tian, who has been listed among Beida's full-time faculty for several years. Beida nominated Tian to membership in the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), an honor reserved for scientists who expend at least half their effort in China. Thanks to Beida's backing, Tian--who was then also listed as a full-time professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)--was elected in 2001 by a margin of one vote. Last spring, Tian left MIT to become a full-time professor at Princeton University.
After the Poincaré lecture, reporters pressed Tian about his employment status in China. He said that he now spends more than 4 months a year at Beida and \"hopes to be a full-time professor later on,\" perhaps after Beida builds a $13 million international institute of mathematics, which Tian will direct.
Some proponents consider part-time academic appointments a critical means of stanching China's loss of scientific talent. Universities and government agencies are boosting quotas for part-timers and upping the ante to entice more top guns to return. Several universities have created \"million-yuan professorships\" with stratospheric--for China--annual salaries equivalent to $125,000. Most returnees are midcareer scientists who accept more modest offers (see sidebar on p. 1722).
Critics, however, contend that part-timers often are less important as professors than as tools in the battle for prestige and resources. Yau claims that researchers who parachute in can hardly contribute in a substantive way to China's scientific development. But the trend seems almost unstoppable, says Shigang He, a neuroscientist currently at CAS's Institute of Biophysics in Beijing: \"I don't think universities will really seriously control this, because they benefit.\"
A call for oversight. Shigang He thinks China's funding agencies should hold part-time professors to their contractual commitments.
CREDIT: COURTESY OF SHIGANG HE
Offers too good to refuse?
Overseas academics began returning to China in the late 1990s, drawn by programs to woo talented scientists back (Science, 21 January 2000, p. 417). The Ministry of Education's Changjiang Scholars Program and CAS's One-Hundred-Talent Plan intended initially to recruit people to work at least 9 months a year--essentially full-time--in China. But top-notch researchers who signed up wanted to help their homeland and keep their jobs overseas: \"If you have a tenured professorship , it does not make sense to give up the position,\" says Jun Liu, a statistician at Harvard.
The education ministry quickly took a new tack, creating a category of part-time Changjiang scholars: jiangzuo, or lecture chairs, for associate professors or higher. They are required to spend no fewer than 3 months--or two, \"under special circumstances\"--in China. But universities eager to attract stars are willing to make exceptions. Ying Xu, a bioinformatics researcher at the University of Georgia, Athens, says he turned down a couple of invitations to apply for a jiangzuo post, citing time constraints. University officials have told him that a 3-month commitment could be met by arriving at the end of the first month and leaving at the beginning of the third--but Xu says \"his conscience did not allow\" him to play that game. (Such overtures, other scientists say, are typical.) Xu chose instead to organize a weeklong symposium in China each summer.
Other part-timers say they are unaware of a time requirement. Liu accepted a jiangzuo post at Beida in 2002, but he acknowledges that he spends only about 1 month a year in China. Gary Becker, a Nobel laureate in economics at the University of Chicago in Illinois who recently joined Beida as a Changjiang jiangzuo, says, \"What I will do is not precise; it will be mainly up to me.\"
Incentive programs have stirred controversy before. CAS began a crackdown after an open letter in 2003 publicized one extreme case of a full-time researcher then at the University of Wisconsin who held grants from three programs and fulfilled a pair of 9-month and one 6-month commitments concurrently. According to CAS's Li Hefeng, the academy so far has canceled the awards of 166 recipients (out of 1005 overseas recruits) and demanded the money back.
Despite allegations that the system is rife with cheating, universities covet part-timers and have lobbied for an expansion of the programs. In 2004, the education ministry raised its annual quota of jiangzuo from 10 to 100. Last year, Beida for the first time appointed more Changjiang part-time (11) than full-time professors (10). Many universities have set up their own programs for illustrious part-timers--\"Nobel laureates\" and \"internationally famous scholars,\" as Zhejiang University's announcement puts it. Whereas Zhejiang is still hoping to snare a Nobel laureate, Beida, in rebutting Yau, touted three among its jiangzuo ranks: \"One can well imagine their contributions to education and research,\" the university stated.
A fair compromise?
Many academics feel that the prestige that comes with hiring part-timers is superficial. \"Some high-profile papers appear to come from China, even though the science didn't really take root ,\" says Mu-Ming Poo, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Berkeley. Chinese universities turn a blind eye to absentee professors as long as they list their Chinese affiliation on papers, adds He.
Tepin (full-time: 9 months) Jiangzuo (part-time: 2-3 months)
University 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Beijing 6 8 9 15 9 11 10 3 4 3 1 1 8 11
Qinghua 5 14 6 10 4 7 7 0 3 1 4 1 7 9
Fudan 6 7 3 4 5 7 8 1 1 0 0 1 5 6
Nanjing 2 6 3 8 5 6 4 0 0 0 0 1 5 2
Zhejiang 2 2 3 9 7 4 6 1 1 0 0 0 3 0
Shanghai Jiao Tong 3 5 7 7 1 4 4 1 0 0 0 0 2 6
(all universities) 66 112 97 135 84 111 101 6 10 10 7 10 79 89
Buying spree. Top Chinese universities are sharply increasing their ranks of part-time researchers from overseas, even as numbers of full-time returnees hold steady.
CREDIT: SOURCE: MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
Indeed, the number of publications with Chinese authors listing multiple affiliations is on the rise. For example, Zhong Lin Wang, a nanotechnology researcher at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, has three affiliations on recent papers in Science: Georgia Tech, Beida, and the National Center for Nanoscience and Technology in Beijing. Wang is part-time director at both Chinese institutions, which hailed his publications on their Web sites. Wang acknowledges that the work was done solely at Georgia Tech. Similar cases abound.
At the same time, some part-timers downplay their moonlighting. Zhensu She, a mathematician at the University of California, Los Angeles, lists in his CV on UCLA's Web site his full-time Changjiang professorship at Beida as an \"award\" in 1999--it was a 5-year contract--and does not mention that he is director of the Key State Laboratory of Turbulence and Complex Systems and deputy director of the Center of Theoretical Biology, both at Beida.
UCLA policy states that \"compensated teaching or research at another institution while employed as a full-time faculty member\" requires \"prior written approval of only the Chancellor or Executive Vice Chancellor.\" As Science went to press, UCLA had not clarified whether She or seven other faculty members with similar positions in China obtained such approval. She did not respond to requests for an interview; a source in UCLA's math department says he is on sabbatical.
Teaming up--or outsourcing?
To many Chinese scientists, the bottom line is not how much time is spent on Chinese soil but whether one contributes to the country's science. Poo helped create the Institute of Neuroscience (ION) in Shanghai in 1999 and since then has been its part-time director. He views his role as enabling young Chinese scientists to gain international recognition based on their own projects and publications. Although Poo spent about 80 days in Shanghai last year, and ION covers his expenses, he does not receive an ION salary. \"I do not have any problems with people like Mu-Ming Poo,\" says He. \"He is really dedicated, working hard, and doing a good job.\"
But critics maintain that part-timers such as Poo are rare; many appear to leverage their own projects by taking advantage of China's abundant student labor. In the late 1990s, Xingwang Deng, a molecular biologist at Yale University, proposed using Beida's \"human resources\" to search for all the genes of the model plant Arabidopsis. The idea appealed to Gu Xiaocheng, a senior biologist, and Chen Zhangliang, then a Beida vice president; the university provided lab space and seed funds. At Yale, Deng taught a young Beida scientist, Qu Li-jia, how to make Arabidopsis mutants.
For his efforts, Deng was appointed a 9-month Changjiang professor by Beida, although he made clear he could not work full-time in China. To reconcile his commitments to Yale and Beida, Deng came up with a \"win-win solution,\" says Gu: Deng persuaded Yale and Beida to establish the Peking-Yale Joint Center for Plant Molecular Genetics and Agro-biotechnology. Under Deng's directorship, the center has been generating data for the Arabidopsis Mutants Database and papers, most of which list Deng as senior author.
Provocateur. Tempers flared after Harvard's Shing-Tung Yau asserted that the majority of Beijing University's overseas recruits are \"fakes.\"
CREDIT: CONAN LEUNG
Given China's \"low level\" of science, Gu says, this kind of arrangement can be beneficial. \"You may call it outsourcing,\" she says, but the resulting exchanges might not have happened otherwise. Qu adds that before the Peking-Yale Center was set up, \"we did not even know how to grow Arabidopsis, but now seven labs at Beida do related work.\"
Other part-timers are following Deng's example. In 2002, Tian Xu, a Howard Hughes Investigator at Yale and a Changjiang jiangzuo at Fudan University in Shanghai, created the Fudan-Yale Biomedical Research Center, which now employs 20 grad students, one postdoc, and more than 40 staff to screen for genes in fruit flies and mice. And UCLA's Shuo Lin, a Changjiang jiangzuo at Beida since 2004, has retained a dozen grad students there to trawl for zebrafish genes.
With these successes, China seems unlikely to wean itself of its part-timer dependence anytime soon. CAS is even spawning a new breed: \"innovation teams\" including five or six senior academics from abroad who will take turns spending a year in China and share a pot of $750,000 for research.
But Yau and other critics insist that the popularity of these programs does not justify the expense. Rather than lavish money on part-time academics, they argue, Chinese institutions should raise stipends of students and young researchers from their present paltry levels of $30 to $160 a month. \"The Chinese government does not pay enough attention to young people,\" Yau says. As long as the brightest young minds seek greener pastures outside China, the brain drain--and the hunger for overseas talents--will continue.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With reporting by Dennis Normile.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The editors suggest the following Related Resources on Science sites:
In Science Magazine
NEWS FOCUS
SCIENTIFIC WORKFORCE: Many Overseas Chinese Researchers Find Coming Home a Revelation
Dennis Normile (22 September 2006)
Science 313 (5794), 1722.
|Summary Science这篇报道的网址是——
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5794/1721 被上海市委书记陈良宇停掉《财经郎闲评》节目的郎咸平教授的声明——
2006-08-28 | 我完全支持丘成桐教授！
http://xianpinglang.blog.sohu.com/11404463.html
我对于邱教授的评价，不是因为今天他对谁做了批评才发出。我对他的评价，发表在两三年前的《经济观察报》记者对我的采访报道上，也收入了《解读郎咸平》一书之中。
当时丘成桐教授是我们香港中文大学特聘讲座教授，他在美国有一半的时间，在我们香港中文大学一半的时间。虽然表面上看他是我的同事，但实际上我是尊称他为师长。他在学术界的专业成就、地位和风范人格也都是我们晚辈后辈所钦佩的。
对于这样一个严谨的数学家而言，这位非常受尊重的数学家，他能够对一些所谓北大的学霸事件提出一些批评，这个本身就有重大的意义。
意义在哪里呢？你发现我们这个社会是需要像这样的批评，因为呢，我写过一篇文章，题目叫《警惕体制内腐败和民间堕落的恶性互动》，我们今天缺什么，我们今天就缺邱教授这样的观点，而且他是一个务实的观点，到最后他能提出实际的数据来证明他的观点。
有人质疑，他的目的是什么。你说他还有什么特别目的，那就是一个知识分子讲一些他认为具有良知的话，我相信他本身的目的是北大更好，为什么希望北大更好，因为“五四”之后北大不是掌全国学术执牛耳嘛，那像这么一所具有传统风范的学校，你带领全国的大专院校，你走在前面，你能够作为堕落的代表吗？
这是我要问的话，所以在这方面我是非常赞同邱教授的意见，我们必须通过各种不同的管道来向社会表达正义之声。那么至于他说提出的批判那是他个人的问题，但是以一个严谨的数学家而言，他能够以学术良知提出学术性的问题本身就值得我们每一个人去做思考。
为什么对国内不正常现象提出批评的总是香港的教授，各位思考一下。你们不也认为应该是北大教授们来指出不对吗？为什么都不是北大？
这点我请在座各位每一个人思考思考，这三年来，重大议题都是由哪个学校提出来的，包括国企改革，包括北大事件，甚至科技大学还有一个教授提出经济学家的标准讨论问题。
我个人必须在这里做个表态，我对于邱教授的学术定位、人品、 良知我给予最高度的评价，而且不是今天才说的，两三年前我就一直是这个观点。他今天对于国内学术界的所谓学霸腐败问题，我依然在公开场合表达我最高程度的支持，其目的不是支持他本人，而是反民间堕落，这是我想告诉公众的一句话。 其实对于庞加莱猜想的证明，关键在于朱熹平与曹怀东干的究竟是——重复佩雷尔曼的工作，还是——弥补了佩雷尔曼工作中的漏洞?
在数学证明中有个词叫gap,就是说，在证明过程中，许多步骤之间，不能一下子过去，可能是省略了，也可能是没搞出来，虽然知道所走的证明路线，但这些“小漏洞”却怎么也跳不过去.这两种情况都叫gap!
毫无疑问，在佩雷尔曼的工作gap很多，关键是，到底这些gap是故意被佩雷尔曼省略了，还是他本人也根本就没证明出来? 哈，这些文字在国内还是少贴些吧
贴多了，丘老恐怕就快成反华反GM分子了
PS：
朱、曹两位是完成了封顶，并不是弥补漏洞，gap应该是在数学学会评审时，每个部分都有专人去完成 中国现在有点乱
页:
[1]