The Embassy of Good Science - User contributions [en]

Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee

2025-11-18T09:07:12Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module introduces the content and '''approach''' of the BEYOND Trainer Guide and provides guidance for developing '''learning goals''' and '''evaluation''' strategies.
|Has Duration=1
|Important For=Early career researchers; Graduate students; Prospective Research Integrity Trainers; Research Ethics Committees; Research integrity trainers; Senior researchers; Supervisors; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=The BEYOND Trainer Guide serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to equip and support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide provides a research-based overview of state-of-the art in teaching research ethics and integrity. According to the extant knowledge base, case-based and collaborative teaching and learning activities, which make use of scaffolding techniques are the best ways to support learning in the context of research ethics and integrity.

This guide provides guidance on how to effectively design teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. It is a comprehensive resource equipped to empower trainers in delivering impactful training sessions. Trainers can adapt and personalise it based on their specific audience, training context, and personal style. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions. by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.

The Trainer Guide can be also found here: https://zenodo.org/records/17222961
|Important Because=Teaching research ethics and research integrity is important for several key reasons including fostering skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.<ref>ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC</ref><ref>Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2011). The singapore statement on research integrity. Accountability in research, 18(2), 71–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296</nowiki> </ref><ref>Science Europe. (2016). Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe member Organisations. <nowiki>https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/</nowiki> </ref> These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Learn about the approach of this guide
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.

Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.

To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:

- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’

- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrity

Facilitation for using existing research ethics and integrity training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on evaluating effectiveness
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programmes achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.

Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:

1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),

2. learning (knowledge, content),

3. behaviour (acting in the research community),

4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for Evaluation Training Programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26.</ref><ref>Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. ''Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22''(3), 215–225. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7]</ref>

Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different times to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:

• during the training (learning process),

• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,

• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)

It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build a culture of integrity.

Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2). By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training
!Tool for collecting learning outputs
!Details
!Analysis instrument
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''''ProLearning'' app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (throughout the training guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=The BEYOND Trainer Guide serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to equip and support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide provides a research-based overview of state-of-the art in teaching research ethics and integrity. According to the extant knowledge base, case-based and collaborative teaching and learning activities, which make use of scaffolding techniques are the best ways to support learning in the context of research ethics and integrity.

This guide provides guidance on how to effectively design teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. It is a comprehensive resource equipped to empower trainers in delivering impactful training sessions. Trainers can adapt and personalize it based on their specific audience, training context, and personal style. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions. by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.

The Trainer Guide can be also found here: https://zenodo.org/records/17222961
|Important Because=Teaching research ethics and research integrity is incredibly important for several key reasons including fostering important skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.<ref>ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC</ref><ref>Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2011). The singapore statement on research integrity. Accountability in research, 18(2), 71–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296</nowiki> </ref><ref>Science Europe. (2016). Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe member Organisations. <nowiki>https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/</nowiki> </ref> These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on the goals of RCR education
|Instruction Step Text=The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.

RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.

As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).<ref name=":0">Van Den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., & Prieß-Buchheit, J. (2023). A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(3). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x</nowiki> </ref> Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour); training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content); outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour); and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).

[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).<ref>Kalichman, M. W., & Plemmons, D. K. (2007). Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. ''Academic Medicine, 82''(9), 846–852. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf]</ref>
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Learn about the approach of this guide
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.

Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.

To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:

- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’

- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrity

Facilitation for using existing RE/RI training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on the goals of RCR education
|Instruction Step Text=The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.

RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.

As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).<ref name=":0">Van Den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., & Prieß-Buchheit, J. (2023). A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(3). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x</nowiki> </ref> Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour); training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content); outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour); and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).

[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).<ref>Kalichman, M. W., & Plemmons, D. K. (2007). Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. ''Academic Medicine, 82''(9), 846–852. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf]</ref>
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on evaluating effectiveness
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools (developed in WP4) are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programs achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.

Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:

1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),

2. learning (knowledge, content),

3. behaviour (acting in the research community),

4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for Evaluation Training Programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26.</ref><ref>Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. ''Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22''(3), 215–225. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7]</ref>

Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different time points to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:

• during the training (learning process),

• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,

• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)

It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build the culture of integrity.

Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2) By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training
!Tool for collecting learning outputs
!Details
!Analysis instrument
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''''ProLearning'' app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (thoughout the trainig guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112

2025-11-18T09:02:00Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Exploring Specific Research Ethics and Integrity Topics
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module presents a collection of existing training materials on research integrity and ethics, developed by various EU-funded initiatives.
|Has Duration=1
|Important For=Academic institutions; Bachelor students; Doctoral students; Early career researchers; Master students; Postgraduate students; Research Integrity Experts; Research institutions; Secondary school students; Senior researchers; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=This module introduces a collection of training materials developed by EU funded initiatives to explore and deepen reflection on relevant research ethics and integrity topics. The following training material can be used within and/or outside the academic environment. The materials presented have been developed by EU-funded initiatives namely: PRINTEGER, RID-SSISS, INTEGRITY and BRIDGE.

For each set of materials developed by each project the target audience is indicated.
|Has Practical Tips=We recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the material to be used. This is due to the fact that the career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=PRINTEGER
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience''': Bachelor and master students, doctoral students and early career researchers.''

Besides the introductory module, the PRINTEGER Upright training provides [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ modules] focusing on specific RE and/or RI issues. These modules address topics in relation the research misconduct, questionable research practices and more research ethics-related topics. Depending on the complexity of the topic, these modules can be used for students and academics with different levels of RE/RI-related competencies.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=RID-SSiSS
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience''': Bachelor and master students, doctoral students and early-career researchers.''

The RID-SSISS training aims to help beginner and more experienced researchers develop their research ethics competencies in HE institutions. A CSCL (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning) ethics resource was designed that utilised cases, collaboration, and structural scaffolding. This resource provides learners with opportunities to gradually develop research ethics competencies, guiding them through three levels. The [https://en.researchethicscompass.net/ Foundation level] focuses on developing (but also helping learners to recall) central concepts of RE/RI, primarily suitable for bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral students but also usable with academic staff and researchers. During the Foundation level training, participants learn to guide their own REI practices and behaviour. The RID-SSISS training also provides resources for ECRs and junior academics. This material aims to develop RE/RI competencies by supporting ethical analysis competencies as a step towards increased agency in research ethics and integrity. Ethical analysis involves the following steps: identify ethical issues by determining which ethical principle might be at stake; and utilise the ethical analysis steps to provide solutions to ethical dilemmas. In addition to the foundational level, the project developed training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=BRIDGE
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience:''' Bachelor and master students, doctoral students and early career researchers.''

The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=This module introduces a collection of training materials developed by EU funded initiatives to explore and deepen reflection on relevant research ethics and integrity topics. The following training material can be used within and/or outside the academic environment. The materials presented have been developed by EU-funded initiatives namely: PRINTEGER, RID-SSISS, INTEGRITY and BRIDGE.

For each set of materials developed by each project the target audience is indicated.
|Has Practical Tips=We recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the material to be used. This is due to the fact that the career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=INTEGRITY
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience''': secondary school students, doctoral students and early career researchers, senior academic and RE/RI experts.''

Empowering researchers to behave responsibly in research is at the heart of the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] course and each individual module. For this purpose several modules each addressing a different research integrity research ethics topic have been developed.

These are specifically designed for 4 different target audiences:

#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-high-school-students/teachers-guide-for-secondary-school/ high school students];
#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate students];
#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ PhD students and]
#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-researchers-supervisors/ researchers and supervisors].
The training materials are presented alongside a [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-high-school-students/teachers-guide-for-secondary-school/ Teacher Guide]
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=PRINTEGER
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience''': Bachelor and master students, doctoral students and early career researchers.''

Besides the introductory module, the PRINTEGER Upright training provides [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ modules] focusing on specific RE and/or RI issues. These modules address topics in relation the research misconduct, questionable research practices and more research ethics-related topics. Depending on the complexity of the topic, these modules can be used for students and academics with different levels of RE/RI-related competencies.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=RID-SSiSS
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience''': Bachelor and master students, doctoral students and early-career researchers.''

The RID-SSISS training aims to help beginner and more experienced researchers develop their research ethics competencies in HE institutions. A CSCL (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning) ethics resource was designed that utilised cases, collaboration, and structural scaffolding. This resource provides learners with opportunities to gradually develop research ethics competencies, guiding them through three levels. The [https://en.researchethicscompass.net/ Foundation level] focuses on developing (but also helping learners to recall) central concepts of RE/RI, primarily suitable for bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral students but also usable with academic staff and researchers. During the Foundation level training, participants learn to guide their own REI practices and behaviour. The RID-SSISS training also provides resources for ECRs and junior academics. This material aims to develop RE/RI competencies by supporting ethical analysis competencies as a step towards increased agency in research ethics and integrity. Ethical analysis involves the following steps: identify ethical issues by determining which ethical principle might be at stake; and utilise the ethical analysis steps to provide solutions to ethical dilemmas. In addition to the foundational level, the project developed training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=BRIDGE
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience:''' Bachelor and master students, doctoral students and early career researchers.''

The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=INTEGRITY
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target audience''': secondary school students, doctoral students and early career researchers, senior academic and RE/RI experts.''

Empowering researchers to behave responsibly in research is at the heart of the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] course and each individual module. For this purpose several modules each addressing a different research integrity research ethics topic have been developed.

These are specifically designed for 4 different target audiences:

#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-high-school-students/teachers-guide-for-secondary-school/ high school students];
#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate students];
#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ PhD students and]
#[https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-researchers-supervisors/ researchers and supervisors].
The training materials are presented alongside a [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-high-school-students/teachers-guide-for-secondary-school/ Teacher Guide]
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc

2025-11-18T08:58:56Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Selecting Appropriate Material and Effectiveness Measurement Tools for your Target Audience
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module gives an overview of '''tools and resources''' that can be used to '''tailor''' your research integrity training to your audience and '''measure its effectiveness'''.
|Has Duration=2
|Important For=Bachelor students; Doctoral students; Early career researchers; Graduate students; Master students; Professors; Research Ethics Committees; Research Ethics Experts; Research integrity trainers; Secondary school students; Senior researchers; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=In this module you will find examples of training materials on research ethics and integrity that can be used to train at specific career stages. The following introduces a collection of trainings developed by EU-funded initiatives and indicate, which trainings or parts of them are suitable for 1) secondary schools, 2) bachelor and master students, 3) PhD students and early career researchers, 4) academics and experts in research ethics and integrity, and 5) supervisors. Although we have categorised the training materials by career stage, we recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the material to be used. This is because career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity. The following training resources have been developed by EU-funded initiatives namely: [[PRINTEGER]], [[ENERI]], [[RID-SSISS]], [[EnTIRE final conference|EnTIRE]], [[Virt2uetraining|VIRT2UE]], [[Path2Integrity]], [[INTEGRITY]], [[BRIDGE]] and [[ROSiE]].

All the training resources presented in this module provide examples of training materials to promote RE/RI and prevent research misconduct from the perspective of individual and institutional responsibilities. Active learning, like case studies, engages learners and helps connect content to real ethical dilemmas. Reflection helps learners explore personal values, making ethical principles and theories more meaningful and guiding individual growth. Role-playing and simulations offer experiential insights, allowing learners to practice decision-making in a safe environment, fostering empathy and ethical confidence. A culturally sensitive approach prepares learners for global collaboration by recognizing diverse ethical norms. Lastly, continuous assessment and constructive feedback reinforce learning, enabling learners to apply ethical principles thoughtfully in real-life scenarios, supporting long-term commitment to research integrity.

Moreover, for each target group this module recommends specific tools and methods to measure the short-, medium- and long-term impact of RE/RI trainings (presented below). While materials and resources have been developed for RE/RI training, they may not always include a plan for the assessment of learning or suggestions on how information about learning can be used as an indicator of training effect.

The same training material presented below are also presented in the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide divided by type of training activity and by the specific EU project responsible for its development. This alternative categorization allows for a more tailored approach, enabling users to quickly identify relevant resources that align with their needs, when they already know what training approaches they wish to use, or seeking further guidance related to using specific teaching approaches rather than seeking resources for a specific target group. By connecting each piece of training material to its originating EU project, we can highlight the distinct contributions of each initiative, showcasing their unique approaches to training.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Secondary School Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of educating secondary school students is to raise their awareness of the ethical and integrity challenges they may face.

Resources for secondary school students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Integrity Teacher Guide]] for secondary school students' education.
*The [[Path2integrity Learning cards]] (Path2Integrity learning cards S) focusing on students in high schools, and a dedicated handbook (S-Series handbook).
For training effectiveness measurement facilitators can use the following tools for learning output collection and for analysing collected material:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/17ORaVeaLjBYucufYNGF6TNjgtqqNdlk5BhSp5bfM5eA/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}

For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups and provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Bachelor and Master Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of training students in research ethics and integrity is to promote an understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability. Although at these levels, students are marginally involved in doing research, it is important to equip them with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Resources for Bachelor and master students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues of the Upright training] developed by the [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER] project
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], the series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] and The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Rotterdam Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials information on the teaching methodology discussing research integrity and its significance], the series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards S]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials S-Series handbook]), and a series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards M]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials (M-Series handbook]) developed byt the Path2Integrity project.
*The [https://en.researchethicscompass.net/ RID-SSISS training Foundation level] focuses on developing (but also helping learners to recall) central concepts of RE/RI
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes]
*The INTEGRITY project training tool for [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate].
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] online games, board games, role-play games and scenarios game can be found [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-games/ here].
*The [https://rosie-project.eu/ ROSiE] Training Materials for Responsible Open Science and the learning resources produced by the ROSIE project available on [https://rosie-project.eu/rosie-knowledge-hub/ ROSiE Knowledge Hub].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students.
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 5: Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1f4xNbQka73bfeDtwKCXTC5W5CoyhfVrtr4dwMXRNmWk/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.[https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_1 <nowiki>[IG(1]</nowiki>] [https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_2 <nowiki>[IG(2]</nowiki>]
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ba_ma%20students.pptx?d=wdfb62d452de140f6a5a8df15611b48e2&csf=1&web=1&e=z2OYsx ENERI CR material example for ba_ma students.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Doctoral Students and Early Career Researchers
|Instruction Step Text=The goal in training students and PhD candidates in RE/RI is to support ever-deepening understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability at all stages of the research process, from conception to dissemination of results. The goal is to equip students with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Although these examples can be used to train students and PhD candidates, they can be used in training more senior profiles to brush up competencies on the topic.

Resources for PhD candidates include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , the modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues anf the dilemmas] ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data]) developed for [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ the Upright training] by [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER].
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and the a series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] produced by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]]. The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and information on the teaching methodology and the learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards Y]) focusing on doctoral students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Y-Series handbook]) developed by [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity Training Programme]
*The RID-SSISS training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
*The [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ modules and a full interactive training] developed by the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] project.
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science ([https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results]).

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for PhD candidates and early career researchers:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
Table 6: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for early-career researchers
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

Examples for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ECRs.pptx?d=w10c8dc6f452042fdae8775faf52ca081&csf=1&web=1&e=NAqYpk ENERI CR material example for ECRs.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Research Ethics and Integrity Experts
|Instruction Step Text=Training research ethics and integrity experts is vital to promoting a culture of responsible research and safeguarding public trust science. These experts play a key role in developing policies, advising researchers, and providing education on ethical practices, data management, and compliance with regulations.

Resources for research ethics and integrity experts include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://eneri.eu/eneri-classroom/ ENERI Classroom] material exploring [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-integrity research integrity], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-ethics research ethics], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/overlapping-issues Comprehensive and overlapping issues] and the [https://classroom.eneri.eu/node/63 development of proper infrastructure] relevant for academics, and research ethics and integrity experts.
*The dilemmas developed by the Upright training ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers], and [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data])
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science s [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results].
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Professors and Senior Academics
|Instruction Step Text=When training professors, trainers, mentors, and supervisors in research integrity, the aim is to equip them with the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively train, mentor and guide their students and junior colleagues in conducting research with integrity.

Resources for professors and senior academics include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] train the trainer course on research integrity and the training module introducing [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]].
*The training materials to foster mentorship and supervision developed by [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-researchers-supervisors/ INTEGRITY].
*The training for supervisors and leaders ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/leadershiplevel leadership level]) developed by the RID-SSISS project.
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-module-for-supervisors/ module for supervisors] developed by [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for Professors and Senior Academics:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 7: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for academics and experts
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context.
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report or pre- and post-texts, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. Analysing vignettes and participating in national REI surveys would be relevant for this target group. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example.pptx?d=w41ec1fe12bbb495781dbe81d55a09d71&csf=1&web=1&e=yxKgSC ENERI CR material example.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Training Research Integrity and Ethics Trainers
|Instruction Step Text=The professionalization of research integrity and ethics trainers is crucial for ensuring high-quality, consistent, and impactful education that fosters a culture of ethical research practices and responsible scientific conduct. The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project designed a Train-the-Trainer training programme with a virtue ethics approach to Ethics and Research Integrity. The VIRT2UE training programme takes a blended learning approach and consists of four components: 1) online course (consisting of 4 modules, addressing [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|introduction to research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|introduction of virtue ethics to research integrity]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]], [[Instruction:7ce7ad50-499a-4cca-b09d-b2c1573d94f3|preparatory readings]] and [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|preparatory watching]]; 2) two consecutive participatory session (during which participants experience five participatory exercises) : [[Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa|Debate and Dialogue]], [[Instruction:747f4d61-3c97-4c4b-acd9-4d69c95f134b|Virtues and Norms]], [[Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c|The Middle Position]], the [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]], and the [[Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea|Self-Declaration Approach]]; 3) [[Instruction:A0d97625-d155-4f6f-abd0-2f84413888ad|interim practice]] work (during which trainers in training go back to their institution practice with the exercises and reflect on their own teaching practices by means of guided self-reflection) and 4) follow up participatory [[Instruction:59a94bad-0356-4141-aecc-0dae37f1a40b|group/reflection section]], in which future trainers can reflect on the experience, learn about teaching strategies and reflect on their own teaching style and audience. The train-the-trainer program developed precise instructions for trainers on how to prepare, organize and facilitate the section. These instructions can be found by clicking on the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|trainer tab]] on the training webpage.
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=In this module you will find examples of training materials on research ethics and integrity that can be used to train at specific career stages. The following introduces a collection of trainings developed by EU-funded initiatives and indicate, which trainings or parts of them are suitable for 1) secondary schools, 2) bachelor and master students, 3) PhD students and early career researchers, 4) academics and experts in research ethics and integrity, and 5) supervisors. Although we have categorised the training materials by career stage, we recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the material to be used. This is because career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity. The following training resources have been developed by EU-funded initiatives namely: [[PRINTEGER]], [[ENERI]], [[RID-SSISS]], [[EnTIRE final conference|EnTIRE]], [[Virt2uetraining|VIRT2UE]], [[Path2Integrity]], [[INTEGRITY]], [[BRIDGE]] and [[ROSiE]].

All the training resources presented in this module provide examples of training materials to promote RE/RI and prevent research misconduct from the perspective of individual and institutional responsibilities. Active learning, like case studies, engages learners and helps connect content to real ethical dilemmas. Reflection helps learners explore personal values, making ethical principles and theories more meaningful and guiding individual growth. Role-playing and simulations offer experiential insights, allowing learners to practice decision-making in a safe environment, fostering empathy and ethical confidence. A culturally sensitive approach prepares learners for global collaboration by recognizing diverse ethical norms. Lastly, continuous assessment and constructive feedback reinforce learning, enabling learners to apply ethical principles thoughtfully in real-life scenarios, supporting long-term commitment to research integrity.

Moreover, for each target group this module recommends specific tools and methods to measure the short-, medium- and long-term impact of RE/RI trainings (presented below). While materials and resources have been developed for RE/RI training, they may not always include a plan for the assessment of learning or suggestions on how information about learning can be used as an indicator of training effect.

The same training material presented below are also presented in the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide divided by type of training activity and by the specific EU project responsible for its development. This alternative categorization allows for a more tailored approach, enabling users to quickly identify relevant resources that align with their needs, when they already know what training approaches they wish to use, or seeking further guidance related to using specific teaching approaches rather than seeking resources for a specific target group. By connecting each piece of training material to its originating EU project, we can highlight the distinct contributions of each initiative, showcasing their unique approaches to training.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Secondary School Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of educating secondary school students is to raise their awareness of the ethical and integrity challenges they may face.

Resources for secondary school students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Integrity Teacher Guide]] for secondary school students' education.
*The [[Path2integrity Learning cards]] (Path2Integrity learning cards S) focusing on students in high schools, and a dedicated handbook (S-Series handbook).
For training effectiveness measurement facilitators can use the following tools for learning output collection and for analysing collected material:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/17ORaVeaLjBYucufYNGF6TNjgtqqNdlk5BhSp5bfM5eA/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}

For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups and provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Bachelor and Master Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of training students in research ethics and integrity is to promote an understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability. Although at these levels, students are marginally involved in doing research, it is important to equip them with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Resources for Bachelor and master students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues of the Upright training] developed by the [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER] project
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], the series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] and The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Rotterdam Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials information on the teaching methodology discussing research integrity and its significance], the series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards S]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials S-Series handbook]), and a series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards M]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials (M-Series handbook]) developed byt the Path2Integrity project.
*The [https://en.researchethicscompass.net/ RID-SSISS training Foundation level] focuses on developing (but also helping learners to recall) central concepts of RE/RI
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes]
*The INTEGRITY project training tool for [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate].
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] online games, board games, role-play games and scenarios game can be found [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-games/ here].
*The [https://rosie-project.eu/ ROSiE] Training Materials for Responsible Open Science and the learning resources produced by the ROSIE project available on [https://rosie-project.eu/rosie-knowledge-hub/ ROSiE Knowledge Hub].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students.
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 5: Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1f4xNbQka73bfeDtwKCXTC5W5CoyhfVrtr4dwMXRNmWk/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.[https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_1 <nowiki>[IG(1]</nowiki>] [https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_2 <nowiki>[IG(2]</nowiki>]
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ba_ma%20students.pptx?d=wdfb62d452de140f6a5a8df15611b48e2&csf=1&web=1&e=z2OYsx ENERI CR material example for ba_ma students.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Doctoral Students and Early Career Researchers
|Instruction Step Text=The goal in training students and PhD candidates in RE/RI is to support ever-deepening understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability at all stages of the research process, from conception to dissemination of results. The goal is to equip students with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Although these examples can be used to train students and PhD candidates, they can be used in training more senior profiles to brush up competencies on the topic.

Resources for PhD candidates include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , the modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues anf the dilemmas] ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data]) developed for [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ the Upright training] by [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER].
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and the a series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] produced by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]]. The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and information on the teaching methodology and the learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards Y]) focusing on doctoral students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Y-Series handbook]) developed by [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity Training Programme]
*The RID-SSISS training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
*The [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ modules and a full interactive training] developed by the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] project.
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science ([https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results]).

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for PhD candidates and early career researchers:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
Table 6: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for early-career researchers
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

Examples for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ECRs.pptx?d=w10c8dc6f452042fdae8775faf52ca081&csf=1&web=1&e=NAqYpk ENERI CR material example for ECRs.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Research Ethics and Integrity Experts
|Instruction Step Text=Training research ethics and integrity experts is vital to promoting a culture of responsible research and safeguarding public trust science. These experts play a key role in developing policies, advising researchers, and providing education on ethical practices, data management, and compliance with regulations.

Resources for research ethics and integrity experts include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://eneri.eu/eneri-classroom/ ENERI Classroom] material exploring [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-integrity research integrity], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-ethics research ethics], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/overlapping-issues Comprehensive and overlapping issues] and the [https://classroom.eneri.eu/node/63 development of proper infrastructure] relevant for academics, and research ethics and integrity experts.
*The dilemmas developed by the Upright training ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers], and [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data])
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science s [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results].
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Professors and Senior Academics
|Instruction Step Text=When training professors, trainers, mentors, and supervisors in research integrity, the aim is to equip them with the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively train, mentor and guide their students and junior colleagues in conducting research with integrity.

Resources for professors and senior academics include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] train the trainer course on research integrity and the training module introducing [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]].
*The training materials to foster mentorship and supervision developed by [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-researchers-supervisors/ INTEGRITY].
*The training for supervisors and leaders ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/leadershiplevel leadership level]) developed by the RID-SSISS project.
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-module-for-supervisors/ module for supervisors] developed by [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for Professors and Senior Academics:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 7: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for academics and experts
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context.
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report or pre- and post-texts, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. Analysing vignettes and participating in national REI surveys would be relevant for this target group. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example.pptx?d=w41ec1fe12bbb495781dbe81d55a09d71&csf=1&web=1&e=yxKgSC ENERI CR material example.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Training Research Integrity and Ethics Trainers
|Instruction Step Text=The professionalization of research integrity and ethics trainers is crucial for ensuring high-quality, consistent, and impactful education that fosters a culture of ethical research practices and responsible scientific conduct. The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project designed a Train-the-Trainer training programme with a virtue ethics approach to Ethics and Research Integrity. The VIRT2UE training programme takes a blended learning approach and consists of four components: 1) online course (consisting of 4 modules, addressing [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|introduction to research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|introduction of virtue ethics to research integrity]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]], [[Instruction:7ce7ad50-499a-4cca-b09d-b2c1573d94f3|preparatory readings]] and [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|preparatory watching]]; 2) two consecutive participatory session (during which participants experience five participatory exercises) : [[Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa|Debate and Dialogue]], [[Instruction:747f4d61-3c97-4c4b-acd9-4d69c95f134b|Virtues and Norms]], [[Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c|The Middle Position]], the [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]], and the [[Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea|Self-Declaration Approach]]; 3) [[Instruction:A0d97625-d155-4f6f-abd0-2f84413888ad|interim practice]] work (during which trainers in training go back to their institution practice with the exercises and reflect on their own teaching practices by means of guided self-reflection) and 4) follow up participatory [[Instruction:59a94bad-0356-4141-aecc-0dae37f1a40b|group/reflection section]], in which future trainers can reflect on the experience, learn about teaching strategies and reflect on their own teaching style and audience. The train-the-trainer program developed precise instructions for trainers on how to prepare, organize and facilitate the section. These instructions can be found by clicking on the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|trainer tab]] on the training webpage.
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:D0ed5ef2-bc83-4f71-b3b0-639ca3c75d7c; Resource:A76fc0c7-2305-4e4a-8ead-122b61bd59c8; Resource:C13f2fea-2e63-4da9-8b9a-e4039c3dfde1; Resource:B06b09e5-6840-4e2b-b1ad-6db249374d08; Resource:F750c4ac-e29c-45d1-b48c-5e0e279d6072; Resource:5e80f964-b042-4f21-80e8-a0f532047269
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc

2025-11-18T08:56:07Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Selecting Appropriate Material and Effectiveness Measurement Tools for your Target Audience
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module gives an overview of '''tools and resources''' that can be used to '''tailor''' your research integrity training to your audience and '''measure its effectiveness'''.
|Has Duration=2
|Important For=Bachelor students; Doctoral students; Early career researchers; Graduate students; Master students; Professors; Research Ethics Committees; Research Ethics Experts; Research integrity trainers; Secondary school students; Senior researchers; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=In this module you will find examples of training materials on research ethics and integrity that can be used to train at specific career stages. The following introduces a collection of trainings developed by EU-funded initiatives and indicate, which trainings or parts of them are suitable for 1) secondary schools, 2) bachelor and master students, 3) PhD students and early career researchers, 4) academics and experts in research ethics and integrity, and 5) supervisors. Although we have categorised the training materials by career stage, we recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the material to be used. This is because career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity. The following training resources have been developed by EU-funded initiatives namely: [[PRINTEGER]], [[ENERI]], [[RID-SSISS]], [[EnTIRE final conference|EnTIRE]], [[Virt2uetraining|VIRT2UE]], [[Path2Integrity]], [[INTEGRITY]], [[BRIDGE]] and [[ROSiE]].

All the training resources presented in this module provide examples of training materials to promote RE/RI and prevent research misconduct from the perspective of individual and institutional responsibilities. Active learning, like case studies, engages learners and helps connect content to real ethical dilemmas. Reflection helps learners explore personal values, making ethical principles and theories more meaningful and guiding individual growth. Role-playing and simulations offer experiential insights, allowing learners to practice decision-making in a safe environment, fostering empathy and ethical confidence. A culturally sensitive approach prepares learners for global collaboration by recognizing diverse ethical norms. Lastly, continuous assessment and constructive feedback reinforce learning, enabling learners to apply ethical principles thoughtfully in real-life scenarios, supporting long-term commitment to research integrity.

Moreover, for each target group this module recommends specific tools and methods to measure the short-, medium- and long-term impact of RE/RI trainings (presented below). While materials and resources have been developed for RE/RI training, they may not always include a plan for the assessment of learning or suggestions on how information about learning can be used as an indicator of training effect.

The same training material presented below are also presented in the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide divided by type of training activity and by the specific EU project responsible for its development. This alternative categorization allows for a more tailored approach, enabling users to quickly identify relevant resources that align with their needs, when they already know what training approaches they wish to use, or seeking further guidance related to using specific teaching approaches rather than seeking resources for a specific target group. By connecting each piece of training material to its originating EU project, we can highlight the distinct contributions of each initiative, showcasing their unique approaches to training.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Secondary School Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of educating secondary school students is to raise their awareness of the ethical and integrity challenges they may face.

Resources for secondary school students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Integrity Teacher Guide]] for secondary school students' education.
*The [[Path2integrity Learning cards]] (Path2Integrity learning cards S) focusing on students in high schools, and a dedicated handbook (S-Series handbook).
For training effectiveness measurement facilitators can use the following tools for learning output collection and for analysing collected material:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/17ORaVeaLjBYucufYNGF6TNjgtqqNdlk5BhSp5bfM5eA/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}

For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups and provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Bachelor and Master Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of training students in research ethics and integrity is to promote an understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability. Although at these levels, students are marginally involved in doing research, it is important to equip them with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Resources for Bachelor and master students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues of the Upright training] developed by the [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER] project
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], the series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] and The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Rotterdam Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials information on the teaching methodology discussing research integrity and its significance], the series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards S]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials S-Series handbook]), and a series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards M]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials (M-Series handbook]) developed byt the Path2Integrity project.
*The [https://en.researchethicscompass.net/ RID-SSISS training Foundation level] focuses on developing (but also helping learners to recall) central concepts of RE/RI
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes]
*The INTEGRITY project training tool for [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate].
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] online games, board games, role-play games and scenarios game can be found [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-games/ here].
*The [https://rosie-project.eu/ ROSiE] Training Materials for Responsible Open Science and the learning resources produced by the ROSIE project available on [https://rosie-project.eu/rosie-knowledge-hub/ ROSiE Knowledge Hub].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students.
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 5: Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1f4xNbQka73bfeDtwKCXTC5W5CoyhfVrtr4dwMXRNmWk/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.[https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_1 <nowiki>[IG(1]</nowiki>] [https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_2 <nowiki>[IG(2]</nowiki>]
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ba_ma%20students.pptx?d=wdfb62d452de140f6a5a8df15611b48e2&csf=1&web=1&e=z2OYsx ENERI CR material example for ba_ma students.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Doctoral Students and Early Career Researchers
|Instruction Step Text=The goal in training students and PhD candidates in RE/RI is to support ever-deepening understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability at all stages of the research process, from conception to dissemination of results. The goal is to equip students with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Although these examples can be used to train students and PhD candidates, they can be used in training more senior profiles to brush up competencies on the topic.

Resources for PhD candidates include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , the modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues anf the dilemmas] ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data]) developed for [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ the Upright training] by [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER].
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and the a series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] produced by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]]. The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and information on the teaching methodology and the learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards Y]) focusing on doctoral students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Y-Series handbook]) developed by [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity Training Programme]
*The RID-SSISS training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
*The [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ modules and a full interactive training] developed by the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] project.
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science ([https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results]).

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for PhD candidates and early career researchers:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
Table 6: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for early-career researchers
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

Examples for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ECRs.pptx?d=w10c8dc6f452042fdae8775faf52ca081&csf=1&web=1&e=NAqYpk ENERI CR material example for ECRs.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Research Ethics and Integrity Experts
|Instruction Step Text=Training research ethics and integrity experts is vital to promoting a culture of responsible research and safeguarding public trust science. These experts play a key role in developing policies, advising researchers, and providing education on ethical practices, data management, and compliance with regulations.

Resources for research ethics and integrity experts include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://eneri.eu/eneri-classroom/ ENERI Classroom] material exploring [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-integrity research integrity], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-ethics research ethics], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/overlapping-issues Comprehensive and overlapping issues] and the [https://classroom.eneri.eu/node/63 development of proper infrastructure] relevant for academics, and research ethics and integrity experts.
*The dilemmas developed by the Upright training ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers], and [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data])
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science s [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results].
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Professors and Senior Academics
|Instruction Step Text=When training professors, trainers, mentors, and supervisors in research integrity, the aim is to equip them with the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively train, mentor and guide their students and junior colleagues in conducting research with integrity.

Resources for professors and senior academics include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] train the trainer course on research integrity and the training module introducing [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]].
*The training materials to foster mentorship and supervision developed by [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-researchers-supervisors/ INTEGRITY].
*The training for supervisors and leaders ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/leadershiplevel leadership level]) developed by the RID-SSISS project.
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-module-for-supervisors/ module for supervisors] developed by [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for Professors and Senior Academics:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 7: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for academics and experts
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context.
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report or pre- and post-texts, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. Analysing vignettes and participating in national REI surveys would be relevant for this target group. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example.pptx?d=w41ec1fe12bbb495781dbe81d55a09d71&csf=1&web=1&e=yxKgSC ENERI CR material example.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Training Research Integrity and Ethics Trainers
|Instruction Step Text=The professionalization of research integrity and ethics trainers is crucial for ensuring high-quality, consistent, and impactful education that fosters a culture of ethical research practices and responsible scientific conduct. The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project designed a Train-the-Trainer training programme with a virtue ethics approach to Ethics and Research Integrity. The VIRT2UE training programme takes a blended learning approach and consists of four components: 1) online course (consisting of 4 modules, addressing [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|introduction to research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|introduction of virtue ethics to research integrity]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]], [[Instruction:7ce7ad50-499a-4cca-b09d-b2c1573d94f3|preparatory readings]] and [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|preparatory watching]]; 2) two consecutive participatory session (during which participants experience five participatory exercises) : [[Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa|Debate and Dialogue]], [[Instruction:747f4d61-3c97-4c4b-acd9-4d69c95f134b|Virtues and Norms]], [[Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c|The Middle Position]], the [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]], and the [[Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea|Self-Declaration Approach]]; 3) [[Instruction:A0d97625-d155-4f6f-abd0-2f84413888ad|interim practice]] work (during which trainers in training go back to their institution practice with the exercises and reflect on their own teaching practices by means of guided self-reflection) and 4) follow up participatory [[Instruction:59a94bad-0356-4141-aecc-0dae37f1a40b|group/reflection section]], in which future trainers can reflect on the experience, learn about teaching strategies and reflect on their own teaching style and audience. The train-the-trainer program developed precise instructions for trainers on how to prepare, organize and facilitate the section. These instructions can be found by clicking on the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|trainer tab]] on the training webpage.
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=In this module you will find examples of training materials on research ethics and integrity that can be used to train at specific career stages. The following introduces a collection of trainings developed by EU-funded initiatives and indicate, which trainings or parts of them are suitable for 1) secondary schools, 2) bachelor and master students, 3) PhD students and early career researchers, 4) academics and experts in research ethics and integrity, and 5) supervisors. Although we have categorised the training materials by career stage, we recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the material to be used. This is because career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity. The following training resources have been developed by EU-funded initiatives namely: [[PRINTEGER]], [[ENERI]], [[RID-SSISS]], [[EnTIRE final conference|EnTIRE]], [[Virt2uetraining|VIRT2UE]], [[Path2Integrity]], [[INTEGRITY]], [[BRIDGE]] and [[ROSiE]].

All the training resources presented in this module provide examples of training materials to promote RE/RI and prevent research misconduct from the perspective of individual and institutional responsibilities. Active learning, like case studies, engages learners and helps connect content to real ethical dilemmas. Reflection helps learners explore personal values, making ethical principles and theories more meaningful and guiding individual growth. Role-playing and simulations offer experiential insights, allowing learners to practice decision-making in a safe environment, fostering empathy and ethical confidence. A culturally sensitive approach prepares learners for global collaboration by recognizing diverse ethical norms. Lastly, continuous assessment and constructive feedback reinforce learning, enabling learners to apply ethical principles thoughtfully in real-life scenarios, supporting long-term commitment to research integrity.

Moreover, for each target group this module recommends specific tools and methods to measure the short-, medium- and long-term impact of RE/RI trainings (presented below). While materials and resources have been developed for RE/RI training, they may not always include a plan for the assessment of learning or suggestions on how information about learning can be used as an indicator of training effect.

The same training material presented below are also presented in the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide divided by type of training activity and by the specific EU project responsible for its development. This alternative categorization allows for a more tailored approach, enabling users to quickly identify relevant resources that align with their needs, when they already know what training approaches they wish to use, or seeking further guidance related to using specific teaching approaches rather than seeking resources for a specific target group. By connecting each piece of training material to its originating EU project, we can highlight the distinct contributions of each initiative, showcasing their unique approaches to training.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Secondary School Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of educating secondary school students is to raise their awareness of the ethical and integrity challenges they may face.

Resources for secondary school students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Integrity Teacher Guide]] for secondary school students' education.
*The [[Path2integrity Learning cards]] (Path2Integrity learning cards S) focusing on students in high schools, and a dedicated handbook (S-Series handbook).
For training effectiveness measurement facilitators can use the following tools for learning output collection and for analysing collected material:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/17ORaVeaLjBYucufYNGF6TNjgtqqNdlk5BhSp5bfM5eA/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}

For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups and provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Bachelor and Master Students
|Instruction Step Text=The aim of training students in research ethics and integrity is to promote an understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability. Although at these levels, students are marginally involved in doing research, it is important to equip them with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Resources for Bachelor and master students include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues of the Upright training] developed by the [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER] project
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], the series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] and The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Rotterdam Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials information on the teaching methodology discussing research integrity and its significance], the series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards S]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials S-Series handbook]), and a series of learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards M]) focusing on bachelor students, alongside a dedicated handbook [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials (M-Series handbook]) developed byt the Path2Integrity project.
*The [https://en.researchethicscompass.net/ RID-SSISS training Foundation level] focuses on developing (but also helping learners to recall) central concepts of RE/RI
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes]
*The INTEGRITY project training tool for [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate].
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] online games, board games, role-play games and scenarios game can be found [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-games/ here].
*The [https://rosie-project.eu/ ROSiE] Training Materials for Responsible Open Science and the learning resources produced by the ROSIE project available on [https://rosie-project.eu/rosie-knowledge-hub/ ROSiE Knowledge Hub].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students.
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 5: Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for bachelor and master students
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''ProLearning app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}''ForgetNot'' (by EduLog): https://web.htk.tlu.ee/forgetnot
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1f4xNbQka73bfeDtwKCXTC5W5CoyhfVrtr4dwMXRNmWk/copy form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.[https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_1 <nowiki>[IG(1]</nowiki>] [https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_2 <nowiki>[IG(2]</nowiki>]
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, ProLearning app or Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ba_ma%20students.pptx?d=wdfb62d452de140f6a5a8df15611b48e2&csf=1&web=1&e=z2OYsx ENERI CR material example for ba_ma students.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Doctoral Students and Early Career Researchers
|Instruction Step Text=The goal in training students and PhD candidates in RE/RI is to support ever-deepening understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability at all stages of the research process, from conception to dissemination of results. The goal is to equip students with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.

Although these examples can be used to train students and PhD candidates, they can be used in training more senior profiles to brush up competencies on the topic.

Resources for PhD candidates include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , the modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues anf the dilemmas] ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data]) developed for [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ the Upright training] by [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER].
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and the a series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] produced by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]]. The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and information on the teaching methodology and the learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards Y]) focusing on doctoral students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Y-Series handbook]) developed by [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity Training Programme]
*The RID-SSISS training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
*The [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ modules and a full interactive training] developed by the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] project.
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science ([https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results]).

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for PhD candidates and early career researchers:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
Table 6: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for early-career researchers
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

Examples for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ECRs.pptx?d=w10c8dc6f452042fdae8775faf52ca081&csf=1&web=1&e=NAqYpk ENERI CR material example for ECRs.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Research Ethics and Integrity Experts
|Instruction Step Text=Training research ethics and integrity experts is vital to promoting a culture of responsible research and safeguarding public trust science. These experts play a key role in developing policies, advising researchers, and providing education on ethical practices, data management, and compliance with regulations.

Resources for research ethics and integrity experts include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [https://eneri.eu/eneri-classroom/ ENERI Classroom] material exploring [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-integrity research integrity], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/research-ethics research ethics], [https://classroom.eneri.eu/overlapping-issues Comprehensive and overlapping issues] and the [https://classroom.eneri.eu/node/63 development of proper infrastructure] relevant for academics, and research ethics and integrity experts.
*The dilemmas developed by the Upright training ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope], [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers], and [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data])
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science s [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity]; [https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results].
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Professors and Senior Academics
|Instruction Step Text=When training professors, trainers, mentors, and supervisors in research integrity, the aim is to equip them with the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively train, mentor and guide their students and junior colleagues in conducting research with integrity.

Resources for professors and senior academics include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):

*The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] train the trainer course on research integrity and the training module introducing [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]].
*The training materials to foster mentorship and supervision developed by [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-researchers-supervisors/ INTEGRITY].
*The training for supervisors and leaders ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/leadershiplevel leadership level]) developed by the RID-SSISS project.
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-module-for-supervisors/ module for supervisors] developed by [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project].

Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for Professors and Senior Academics:

{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 7: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for academics and experts
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context.
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report or pre- and post-texts, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. Analysing vignettes and participating in national REI surveys would be relevant for this target group. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.

An example for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example.pptx?d=w41ec1fe12bbb495781dbe81d55a09d71&csf=1&web=1&e=yxKgSC ENERI CR material example.pptx]

<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).

<nowiki>**</nowiki> Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Training Materials for Training Research Integrity and Ethics Trainers
|Instruction Step Text=The professionalization of research integrity and ethics trainers is crucial for ensuring high-quality, consistent, and impactful education that fosters a culture of ethical research practices and responsible scientific conduct. The [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project designed a Train-the-Trainer training programme with a virtue ethics approach to Ethics and Research Integrity. The VIRT2UE training programme takes a blended learning approach and consists of four components: 1) online course (consisting of 4 modules, addressing [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|introduction to research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|introduction of virtue ethics to research integrity]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and [[Instruction:D3ee617b-5d9b-4c47-a015-030b0354c9d2|supervision and mentorship practices]], [[Instruction:7ce7ad50-499a-4cca-b09d-b2c1573d94f3|preparatory readings]] and [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|preparatory watching]]; 2) two consecutive participatory session (during which participants experience five participatory exercises) : [[Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa|Debate and Dialogue]], [[Instruction:747f4d61-3c97-4c4b-acd9-4d69c95f134b|Virtues and Norms]], [[Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c|The Middle Position]], the [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]], and the [[Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea|Self-Declaration Approach]]; 3) [[Instruction:A0d97625-d155-4f6f-abd0-2f84413888ad|interim practice]] work (during which trainers in training go back to their institution practice with the exercises and reflect on their own teaching practices by means of guided self-reflection) and 4) follow up participatory [[Instruction:59a94bad-0356-4141-aecc-0dae37f1a40b|group/reflection section]], in which future trainers can reflect on the experience, learn about teaching strategies and reflect on their own teaching style and audience. The train-the-trainer program developed precise instructions for trainers on how to prepare, organize and facilitate the section. These instructions can be found by clicking on the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|trainer tab]] on the training webpage.
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:D0ed5ef2-bc83-4f71-b3b0-639ca3c75d7c; Resource:A76fc0c7-2305-4e4a-8ead-122b61bd59c8; Resource:C13f2fea-2e63-4da9-8b9a-e4039c3dfde1; Resource:B06b09e5-6840-4e2b-b1ad-6db249374d08; Resource:F750c4ac-e29c-45d1-b48c-5e0e279d6072; Resource:5e80f964-b042-4f21-80e8-a0f532047269
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81

2025-11-18T08:52:16Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Using Different Learning Taxonomies
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module provides guidance on how to use the '''Bloom''', '''SOLO''' and '''Significant Learning (Fink's)''' taxonomies for the creation of effective and impactful learning objectives.
|Has Duration=2
|Important For=Academic staff; Prospective Research Integrity Trainers; Research integrity trainers; Senior researchers; Teachers
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=Defining learning objectives serves as a cornerstone for creating successful and impactful learning environments. Learning objectives, i.e. what the learners should learn by taking part in the training, guides the choice of the learning process, the content, activities and assessment. This should guide the choice of content, activities and assessment. Using taxonomies for defining learning objectives can help trainers ensure that the teaching is geared towards supporting learning in an adequate way. For instance, if the expectation is that learners can employ research ethics procedures in practice, it may not be sufficient to have learning goals that emphasise memorising or familiarising, but optimally there would be learning goals for application of knowledge as well. Taxonomies are helpful for setting and calibrating training at the proper level. Learning objectives can be defined by using different taxonomies. [https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/BloomsTaxonomy Bloom's taxonomy] categorises educational goals into a hierarchical model, from simple recall of facts to complex evaluation and creation tasks. The [https://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/ SOLO] (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy, on the other hand, describes levels of increasing complexity in a learner's understanding of subjects, ranging from unistructural to extended abstract levels.
|Important Because=Learning is what the learner does, but it can be facilitated through what trainers do and through appropriate teaching activities.<ref>Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development/Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105</nowiki></ref> The Taxonomy of Significant Learning (sometimes also referred as the [https://www.buffalo.edu/catt/teach/develop/design/learning-outcomes/finks.html Fink’s taxonomy]) is not hierarchical in the same way as the other two, however, it builds on Blooms’ taxonomy by including a long-forgotten affective component into the discussion (namely caring).<ref name=":0">Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: an integrated approach to designing college courses (Revised and updated edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.</ref> It encourages to include into the learning outcomes the objectives foundational knowledge, application, integration, a human dimension, caring, and learning to acquire competencies, thus providing a holistic approach to learning.<ref name=":0" /> However, since the existing material aligns with Bloom's and SOLO frameworks, this module will primarily describe these two to ensure coherence and consistency in training delivery. Nevertheless, we encourage trainers to also consider the more effective type of learning objectives proposed in the Taxonomy of Significant Learning.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Use the Bloom’s taxonomy
|Instruction Step Text=Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known educational framework that offers a methodical way to classify learning objectives according to cognitive difficulty. (e.g., Adams, 2015).<ref>Adams, N. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(3), 152–153. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010</nowiki> </ref> It is a hierarchical framework that uses cognitive complexity to classify learning objectives. Benjamin Bloom created it in the 1950s, and it is now a vital instrument in educational theory and practice. The taxonomy is divided into six stages: remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The levels are arranged from lower to higher order cognitive skills. Fundamentally, remembering entails recollecting words, information, and fundamental ideas. Understanding is more than just remembering concepts; it also involves understanding meanings. Applying necessitates applying knowledge to novel contexts or problem-solving. Analysing means dissecting data into its constituent elements and identifying connections between them. Making decisions based on standards and criteria is the process of evaluating. Creating, in the end, involves coming up with original concepts and/or interpretations. The goal of applying Bloom's Taxonomy to training aims and results is to enhance comprehension by considering the knowledge, skills, and competencies that the specific training programmes were created to impart. The Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, and Creating domains of Bloom's Taxonomy each reflect a different cognitive process and the depth and complexity of learning.

[[File:BloomsTaxonomy.jpg|alt=|center|frame|Fig 21. Bloom’s Taxonomy (taken from the Centre for teaching, Vanderbilt University. <nowiki>https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/</nowiki>) ]]

All taxonomic levels are relevant irrespective of the study or career level. However, the taxonomic levels may mean different things for different individuals. For example, application of knowledge may mean engaging with research designs, but senior researchers often use more complex designs than students still learning how to do research. Nevertheless, it is essential that the learning extends beyond remembering and understanding, and that the complexity of activities at all levels gradually grow as the individual gains experience, knowledge and confidence.

· '''remembering and understanding:''' focus on memorizing key ethics concepts and theories. For example, students should master basic principles and terminology related to ethics and integrity.

· '''applying and analysing''': engage in practical applications and critical thinking. Apply ethics concepts to real-life scenarios, such as conducting experiments and analyzing data.

· '''evaluating and creating''': evaluate research findings and create new knowledge. Encourage learners to think critically and innovate in ethical dilemmas.

<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Use the SOLO taxonomy
|Instruction Step Text=Besides using Bloom’s Taxonomy to define learning objectives, the [https://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/ SOLO Taxonomy] can be used .<ref name=":0">Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development/Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105</nowiki></ref><ref name=":1">Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Using Constructive Alignment in Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning Teaching for Quality Learning at University (3rd ed., pp. 50-63). Maidenhead: Open University Press. </ref> The Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, or SOLO, is a way to set the learning outcomes according to how complicated they are.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> This allows us to evaluate students' work based on its quality following the idea of increasing understanding of complexities: Initially, we learn one or a few aspects of the task (unistructural), then multiple aspects that are unrelated to each other (multistructural), then we learn how to integrate them into a whole (relational), and lastly, we can generalise that whole to still-untaught applications (extended abstract). It evaluates the quality of students' work and understanding:

· '''pre-structural''': identify basic ethical concepts without fully understanding them.

· '''unistructural''': recognize and label simple ethical procedures.

· '''multistructural''': enumerate and describe ethical principles but struggle to connect them.

· '''relational''': analyze and apply ethical concepts, understanding interrelations.

· '''extended abstract''': generalize and theorize ethical principles to solve novel dilemmas.[[File:SOLOtaxonomy.png|alt=|center|frame|Fig 32. SOLO taxonomy (taken from Tammeleht & Löfström, 2023)]]

The SOLO taxonomy has been used to evaluate effectiveness of trainings as well as the development of ethical sensitivity and has been proven to be effective in the context of research ethics and integrity training.<ref>Löfström, E. (2012). Students’ ethical awareness and conceptions of Research Ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 22(5), 349–361. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2012.679136</nowiki> </ref><ref>Tammeleht, A., & Löfström, E. (2023). Learners’ self-assessment as a measure to evaluate the effectiveness of research ethics and integrity training: can we rely on self-reports? Ethics & Behavior, 1–22. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2023.2266073</nowiki> </ref><ref>Tammeleht, A., Löfström, E. & Rodríguez-Triana, M. J. (2022). Facilitating development of research ethics and integrity leadership competencies. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 18, 11, 1-23. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-022-00102-3</nowiki> </ref><ref>Tammeleht, A., Löfström, E., & Rajando, K. (Accepted 2024) Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity competence development – what do learning diaries tell us about learning? International Journal of Ethics Education. <div></div></ref> The verbs emphasised in the descriptions below can be used as indicators of the appropriate levels in learning objectives.

''Pre-structural level (0)''

At the pre-structural level the learner fails to identify or approach topics in a meaningful way, but simply repeats the words in the question without understanding them.

''Unistructural level (1)''

At the unistructural level, the learner has sufficient knowledge to identify, recognise, count, find, label, match, name, and perform follow simple procedures. The learner identifies one relevant aspect displaying some familiarity with relevant concepts, but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it. In the context of research ethics and integrity, this may mean identifying certain, perhaps common concepts, but having a limited view of them. For example, the learner may be able to identify some of the things that ought to be mentioned in an information letter to research participants but fails to understand all aspects of ensuring voluntary participation in research.

''Multi-structural level (2)''

At the multistructural level, the learner can enumerate, describe, illustrate, list, sequence, select, combine, and follow procedures, but struggles to make connections between concepts or draw conclusions based on interrelations. For example, the learner may understand that informed consent is necessary in research but fails to understand that this is so because of the need to respect people’s autonomy and right to make decisions that concern themselves.

''Relational level (3)''

At the relational level, the learner displays an ability to address the most relevant aspects of the concept and provide explanations pointing out interrelations and providing examples demonstrating their own reasoning. Corresponding action verbs include; analyse, apply, argue, compare, contrast, critique, explain causes, relate and justify. For example, the learner understands at least the main mechanisms and connections between FFP and the detrimental effects to science.

''Extended abstract level (4)''

At the extended abstract level, the coherent whole is generalised or re-conceptualised at a higher level of abstraction. The learner grasps a more abstract version of the concept, and recognises other domains to which the concept might be applied by displaying the ability to theorise, generate, generalise, hypothesise, create or reflect, formulate and reflect. For example, the learner is able to use knowledge about ethical analysis and ethical principles to solve a novel integrity-related dilemma, which the learner recognises is affecting a research group, but to which the learner has not been exposed before.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Use The Taxonomy of Significant Learning
|Instruction Step Text=The taxonomy of Significant Learning or the Fink’s taxonomy is a non-hierarchical system that helps trainers devise learning outcomes to support deep learning. No dimension is considered more important than the other and within the course various aspects should be present.<ref name=":0">Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: an integrated approach to designing college courses (Revised and updated edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.</ref> Thus, this taxonomy provides an alternative frame for devising learning objectives for training.

· '''foundational knowledge''': understand and recall ethical information.

· '''application''': demonstrate skills in ethical analysis and problem-solving.

· '''integration''': connect ethical theories and compare different approaches.

· '''human dimension''': recognize the impact of ethical decisions on oneself and others.

· '''caring''': develop empathy and values related to ethics.

· '''learning to learn:''' reflect on the learning process and self-assess ethical understanding.<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Apply and Compare the Taxonomies
|Instruction Step Text=To illustrate how the taxonomies can be applied in creating learning objectives for training, we provide an example of an analysis of learning outcomes in RID-SSISS training material based on the three taxonomies (Table 1).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
Table 1: Example of an analysis of learning outcomes in RID-SSISS training material based on three taxonomies
!Level of training material
!Learning outcomes
!Bloom
!SOLO
!Fink
{{!}}-
{{!}} rowspan="3"{{!}}Foundational level
{{!}}Raise awareness of ethical issues during the research process;
{{!}}remember, understand
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge
{{!}}-
{{!}}Practice utilising the codes of conduct, being familiar with central topics;
{{!}}understand, apply, analyse
{{!}}relational, extended abstract
{{!}}application, integration
{{!}}-
{{!}}Learn together as a team, collaborate with peers.
{{!}}evaluate
{{!}}relational
{{!}}human dimension, learning to learn, caring
{{!}}-
{{!}} rowspan="3"{{!}}Advanced level
{{!}}Develop one’s research ethics competencies by combining previous knowledge and implementing new tools;
{{!}}understand, apply
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}}Identify ethical issues by determining which ethical principle might be at stake.<ref name=":0">Kitchener, K. S. (1985). Ethical principles and ethical decisions in student affairs. ''New Directions for Student Services, 30,'' 17–29. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/ss.37119853004 https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.37119853004]</ref>
{{!}}analyse, evaluate
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}application, integration
{{!}}-
{{!}}Utilise the ethical analysis steps to provide solutions to ethical dilemmas (in groups).<ref name=":1">Mustajoki, A. S., & Mustajoki, H. (2017). ''A new approach to research ethics: Using guided dialogue to strengthen research communities''. Routledge. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315545318</nowiki></ref>
{{!}}apply, analyse, evaluate, create
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational, extended abstract
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration,
human dimension,

caring, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}} rowspan="5"{{!}}Leadership level
{{!}}Develop research ethics competencies by combining previous knowledge and implementing new tools;
{{!}}understand, apply
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}}Identify which ethical principles might be at stake in a case.<ref name=":0" />
{{!}}analyse, evaluate
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}application, integration
{{!}}-
{{!}}Utilise the ethical analysis steps to provide solutions to ethical dilemmas.<ref name=":1" />
{{!}}apply, analyse, evaluate, create
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational, extended abstract
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration,
human dimension,

caring, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}}Implement different ethical approaches to the possible courses of action;
{{!}}analyse, evaluate
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration,
{{!}}-
{{!}}Take the role of a REI leader and display (some) REI leadership competencies during their group work.
{{!}}apply, analyse, evaluate, create
{{!}}relational, extended abstract
{{!}}human dimension, caring, learning to learn
{{!}}}
Learning taxonomies are helpful not only in the design of learning goals for teaching, but also in devising appropriate targets of assessment. The coordination between learning goals or objectives, the methods used for teaching and the activities chosen to support learning, as well as the assessment of the learning are referred to as constructive alignment.<ref>Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. ''Higher Education'', 32, 347–364. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00138871</nowiki></ref><ref>Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development/Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105</nowiki> </ref><ref>Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Using Constructive Alignment in Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning Teaching for Quality Learning at University (3rd ed., pp. 50-63). Maidenhead: Open University Press. </ref> This means that the core components of a teaching should be geared towards supporting the same aim; namely learning. Learning taxonomies are helpful not only in the design of learning goals for teaching, but also in devising appropriate targets of assessment.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=Defining learning objectives serves as a cornerstone for creating successful and impactful learning environments. Learning objectives, i.e. what the learners should learn by taking part in the training, guides the choice of the learning process, the content, activities and assessment. Learning objectives can be defined by using different taxonomies. [https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/BloomsTaxonomy Bloom's taxonomy] categorises educational goals into a hierarchical model, from simple recall of facts to complex evaluation and creation tasks. The [https://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/ SOLO] (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy, on the other hand, describes levels of increasing complexity in a learner's understanding of subjects, ranging from unistructural to extended abstract levels.
|Important Because=Learning is what the learner does, but it can be facilitated through what trainers do and through appropriate teaching activities.<ref>Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development/Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105</nowiki></ref> The Taxonomy of Significant Learning (sometimes also referred as the [https://www.buffalo.edu/catt/teach/develop/design/learning-outcomes/finks.html Fink’s taxonomy]) is not hierarchical in the same way as the other two, however, it builds on Blooms’ taxonomy by including a long-forgotten affective component into the discussion (namely caring).<ref name=":0">Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: an integrated approach to designing college courses (Revised and updated edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.</ref> It encourages to include into the learning outcomes the objectives foundational knowledge, application, integration, a human dimension, caring, and learning to acquire competencies, thus providing a holistic approach to learning.<ref name=":0" /> However, since the existing material aligns with Bloom's and SOLO frameworks, this module will primarily describe these two to ensure coherence and consistency in training delivery. Nevertheless, we encourage trainers to also consider the more effective type of learning objectives proposed in the Taxonomy of Significant Learning.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Use the Bloom’s taxonomy
|Instruction Step Text=Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known educational framework that offers a methodical way to classify learning objectives according to cognitive difficulty. (e.g., Adams, 2015).<ref>Adams, N. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(3), 152–153. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010</nowiki> </ref> It is a hierarchical framework that uses cognitive complexity to classify learning objectives. Benjamin Bloom created it in the 1950s, and it is now a vital instrument in educational theory and practice. The taxonomy is divided into six stages: remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The levels are arranged from lower to higher order cognitive skills. Fundamentally, remembering entails recollecting words, information, and fundamental ideas. Understanding is more than just remembering concepts; it also involves understanding meanings. Applying necessitates applying knowledge to novel contexts or problem-solving. Analysing means dissecting data into its constituent elements and identifying connections between them. Making decisions based on standards and criteria is the process of evaluating. Creating, in the end, involves coming up with original concepts and/or interpretations. The goal of applying Bloom's Taxonomy to training aims and results is to enhance comprehension by considering the knowledge, skills, and competencies that the specific training programmes were created to impart. The Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, and Creating domains of Bloom's Taxonomy each reflect a different cognitive process and the depth and complexity of learning.

[[File:BloomsTaxonomy.jpg|alt=|center|frame|Fig 21. Bloom’s Taxonomy (taken from the Centre for teaching, Vanderbilt University. <nowiki>https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/</nowiki>) ]]

All taxonomic levels are relevant irrespective of the study or career level. However, the taxonomic levels may mean different things for different individuals. For example, application of knowledge may mean engaging with research designs, but senior researchers often use more complex designs than students still learning how to do research. Nevertheless, it is essential that the learning extends beyond remembering and understanding, and that the complexity of activities at all levels gradually grow as the individual gains experience, knowledge and confidence.

''Remembering and understanding:''

Here, the focus is on memorising key facts, concepts and theories relevant to the field of research and innovation. Understanding these foundational elements is critical to moving forward. For example, undergraduate students need to master the basic principles and terminology related to ethics and integrity to effectively navigate through more complex topics later. Similarly, individuals pursuing a PhD or who are new to academia need a solid understanding of basic concepts before they can conduct more in-depth analyses and applications, such as mastering the ethics of their own PhD research. Moreover, senior researchers may need to understand the basic concept of supervision and mentoring practices when it comes to supervising a team and PhD candidates.

''Apply and analyse:''

Learning should always be an active endeavour irrespective of career or studies applying and analysing knowledge. This is where the emphasis shifts to practical application and critical thinking. Early career researchers, junior professors and academics need competencies for applying the ethics and integrity concepts they have learnt to real-life scenarios in connection to conducting experiments, collecting data and critically analysing the results to gain meaningful insights. Through these activities, participants develop the skills necessary to contribute to the advancement of their field and address research questions with greater depth and sophistication. In terms of research ethics and integrity, this involves applying such knowledge and values to every step of the research.

''Evaluate and create:''

The highest level in Bloom’s Taxonomy involves evaluating existing knowledge and creating new knowledge. All researchers play a critical role in shaping the direction of research and innovation. They are responsible for assessing the validity and significance of research findings and identifying areas for further investigation and innovation. By synthesising existing knowledge and developing new ideas, theories or methods, researchers develop their field forward and inspire the next generation of researchers and innovators. All RE/RI training should include components, which encourage learners to extend their thinking to evaluation and creation. In practice, this involves having such a robust knowledge base and values so that even when encountering new ethical dilemmas or being posed with a novel potentially integrity-threatening situation, they can rely on having the ‘tools’ to handle the situation.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Use the SOLO taxonomy
|Instruction Step Text=Besides using Bloom’s Taxonomy to define learning objectives, the [https://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/ SOLO Taxonomy] can be used .<ref name=":0">Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development/Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105</nowiki></ref><ref name=":1">Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Using Constructive Alignment in Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning Teaching for Quality Learning at University (3rd ed., pp. 50-63). Maidenhead: Open University Press. </ref> The Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, or SOLO, is a way to set the learning outcomes according to how complicated they are.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> In this way, the students' work can be assessed according to its quality and not according to how many parts they have understood correctly: initially, we learn one or a few aspects of the task (unistructural), then multiple aspects that are unrelated to each other (multistructural), then we learn how to integrate them into a whole (relational), and lastly, we can generalise that whole to still-untaught applications (extended abstract).

[[File:SOLOtaxonomy.png|alt=|center|frame|Fig 32. SOLO taxonomy (taken from Tammeleht & Löfström, 2023)]]

The SOLO taxonomy has been used to evaluate effectiveness of trainings as well as the development of ethical sensitivity and has been proven to be effective in the context of research ethics and integrity training.<ref>Löfström, E. (2012). Students’ ethical awareness and conceptions of Research Ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 22(5), 349–361. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2012.679136</nowiki> </ref><ref>Tammeleht, A., & Löfström, E. (2023). Learners’ self-assessment as a measure to evaluate the effectiveness of research ethics and integrity training: can we rely on self-reports? Ethics & Behavior, 1–22. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2023.2266073</nowiki> </ref><ref>Tammeleht, A., Löfström, E. & Rodríguez-Triana, M. J. (2022). Facilitating development of research ethics and integrity leadership competencies. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 18, 11, 1-23. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-022-00102-3</nowiki> </ref><ref>Tammeleht, A., Löfström, E., & Rajando, K. (Accepted 2024) Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity competence development – what do learning diaries tell us about learning? International Journal of Ethics Education. <div></div></ref> The verbs emphasised in the descriptions below can be used as indicators of the appropriate levels in learning objectives.

''Pre-structural level (0)''

At the pre-structural level the learner fails to identify or approach topics in a meaningful way, but simply repeats the words in the question without understanding them.

''Unistructural level (1)''

At the unistructural level, the learner has sufficient knowledge to identify, recognise, count, find, label, match, name, and perform follow simple procedures. The learner identifies one relevant aspect displaying some familiarity with relevant concepts, but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it. In the context of research ethics and integrity, this may mean identifying certain, perhaps common concepts, but having a limited view of them. For example, the learner may be able to identify some of the things that ought to be mentioned in an information letter to research participants but fails to understand all aspects of ensuring voluntary participation in research.

''Multi-structural level (2)''

At the multistructural level, the learner can enumerate, describe, illustrate, list, sequence, select, combine, and follow procedures, but struggles to make connections between concepts or draw conclusions based on interrelations. For example, the learner may understand that informed consent is necessary in research but fails to understand that this is so because of the need to respect people’s autonomy and right to make decisions that concern themselves.

''Relational level (3)''

At the relational level, the learner displays an ability to address the most relevant aspects of the concept and provide explanations pointing out interrelations and providing examples demonstrating their own reasoning. Corresponding action verbs include; analyse, apply, argue, compare, contrast, critique, explain causes, relate and justify. For example, the learner understands at least the main mechanisms and connections between FFP and the detrimental effects to science.

''Extended abstract level (4)''

At the extended abstract level, the coherent whole is generalised or re-conceptualised at a higher level of abstraction. The learner grasps a more abstract version of the concept, and recognises other domains to which the concept might be applied by displaying the ability to theorise, generate, generalise, hypothesise, create or reflect, formulate and reflect. For example, the learner is able to use knowledge about ethical analysis and ethical principles to solve a novel integrity-related dilemma, which the learner recognises is affecting a research group, but to which the learner has not been exposed before.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Use The Taxonomy of Significant Learning
|Instruction Step Text=The taxonomy of Significant Learning or the Fink’s taxonomy is a non-hierarchical system that helps trainers devise learning outcomes to support deep learning. No dimension is considered more important than the other and within the course various aspects should be present.<ref name=":0">Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: an integrated approach to designing college courses (Revised and updated edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.</ref> Thus, this taxonomy provides an alternative frame for devising learning objectives for training. The fact that this taxonomy emphasises care and empathy makes it very suitable for training on ethics and integrity. The following is a short overview of the various dimensions:

''Foundational knowledge''

This dimension focuses on content knowledge and includes recalling and understanding of information and ideas.

''Application''

Here the learner demonstrates skills – they can be related to the use of knowledge or include skills necessary to interact in the subject, e.g. critical and creative thinking, decision-making, solving problems etc. For example, using the steps of ethical analysis to solve a situation involving an integrity-related challenge.

''Integration''

In this dimension the learner perceives connections between various ideas, disciplines, and experiences. It includes relating various ideas to each other, comparing, contrasting ideas and examples, and so on. For example, in solving an ethical issue, different ethical theoretical viewpoints may lead to diverse actions and solutions. Recognising how for example a virtue ethical approach may lead to a different solution than reasoning based on utilitarianism may be an expression of integration.

''Human dimension''

Learners learn with others, and they gain new understanding of themselves as well as others and alsoin the learning process. They recognise how people influence each other. Understanding how to respectfully work together for the greater good is an example of how the human dimension materialises positively in practice.

''Caring''

The caring dimension includes an affective stance and involves change in a learner. The learners start to see the reason to care about a topic, they gain new interests, feelings and values about the subject. Empathy and an ethics of care are values compatible with caring.

''Learning to learn''

In this dimension the learner understands that it is not only the outcome of learning that matters but also the process is important. This dimension includes guiding one’s learning for instance by inquiry, reflection and self-assessment. The role of reflection has been emphasised as a key activity in learning and individual development.<ref name=":0" />
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Apply and Compare the Taxonomies
|Instruction Step Text=To illustrate how the taxonomies can be applied in creating learning objectives for training, we provide an example of an analysis of learning outcomes in RID-SSISS training material based on the three taxonomies (Table 1).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+
Table 1: Example of an analysis of learning outcomes in RID-SSISS training material based on three taxonomies
!Level of training material
!Learning outcomes
!Bloom
!SOLO
!Fink
{{!}}-
{{!}} rowspan="3"{{!}}Foundational level
{{!}}Raise awareness of ethical issues during the research process;
{{!}}remember, understand
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge
{{!}}-
{{!}}Practice utilising the codes of conduct, being familiar with central topics;
{{!}}understand, apply, analyse
{{!}}relational, extended abstract
{{!}}application, integration
{{!}}-
{{!}}Learn together as a team, collaborate with peers.
{{!}}evaluate
{{!}}relational
{{!}}human dimension, learning to learn, caring
{{!}}-
{{!}} rowspan="3"{{!}}Advanced level
{{!}}Develop one’s research ethics competencies by combining previous knowledge and implementing new tools;
{{!}}understand, apply
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}}Identify ethical issues by determining which ethical principle might be at stake.<ref name=":0">Kitchener, K. S. (1985). Ethical principles and ethical decisions in student affairs. ''New Directions for Student Services, 30,'' 17–29. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/ss.37119853004 https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.37119853004]</ref>
{{!}}analyse, evaluate
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}application, integration
{{!}}-
{{!}}Utilise the ethical analysis steps to provide solutions to ethical dilemmas (in groups).<ref name=":1">Mustajoki, A. S., & Mustajoki, H. (2017). ''A new approach to research ethics: Using guided dialogue to strengthen research communities''. Routledge. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315545318</nowiki></ref>
{{!}}apply, analyse, evaluate, create
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational, extended abstract
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration,
human dimension,

caring, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}} rowspan="5"{{!}}Leadership level
{{!}}Develop research ethics competencies by combining previous knowledge and implementing new tools;
{{!}}understand, apply
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}}Identify which ethical principles might be at stake in a case.<ref name=":0" />
{{!}}analyse, evaluate
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}application, integration
{{!}}-
{{!}}Utilise the ethical analysis steps to provide solutions to ethical dilemmas.<ref name=":1" />
{{!}}apply, analyse, evaluate, create
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational, extended abstract
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration,
human dimension,

caring, learning to learn
{{!}}-
{{!}}Implement different ethical approaches to the possible courses of action;
{{!}}analyse, evaluate
{{!}}unistructural, multistructural, relational
{{!}}foundational knowledge, application, integration,
{{!}}-
{{!}}Take the role of a REI leader and display (some) REI leadership competencies during their group work.
{{!}}apply, analyse, evaluate, create
{{!}}relational, extended abstract
{{!}}human dimension, caring, learning to learn
{{!}}}
Learning taxonomies are helpful not only in the design of learning goals for teaching, but also in devising appropriate targets of assessment. The coordination between learning goals or objectives, the methods used for teaching and the activities chosen to support learning, as well as the assessment of the learning are referred to as constructive alignment.<ref>Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. ''Higher Education'', 32, 347–364. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00138871</nowiki></ref><ref>Biggs, J. (1999). What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development/Higher Education Research and Development, 18(1), 57–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105</nowiki> </ref><ref>Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Using Constructive Alignment in Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning Teaching for Quality Learning at University (3rd ed., pp. 50-63). Maidenhead: Open University Press. </ref> This means that the core components of a teaching should be geared towards supporting the same aim; namely learning. Learning taxonomies are helpful not only in the design of learning goals for teaching, but also in devising appropriate targets of assessment.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee

2025-11-18T08:44:28Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module introduces the content and '''approach''' of the BEYOND Trainer Guide and provides guidance for developing '''learning goals''' and '''evaluation''' strategies.
|Has Duration=1
|Important For=Early career researchers; Graduate students; Prospective Research Integrity Trainers; Research Ethics Committees; Research integrity trainers; Senior researchers; Supervisors; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=The BEYOND Trainer Guide serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to equip and support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide provides a research-based overview of state-of-the art in teaching research ethics and integrity. According to the extant knowledge base, case-based and collaborative teaching and learning activities, which make use of scaffolding techniques are the best ways to support learning in the context of research ethics and integrity.

This guide provides guidance on how to effectively design teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. It is a comprehensive resource equipped to empower trainers in delivering impactful training sessions. Trainers can adapt and personalise it based on their specific audience, training context, and personal style. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions. by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.
|Important Because=Teaching research ethics and research integrity is important for several key reasons including fostering skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.<ref>ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC</ref><ref>Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2011). The singapore statement on research integrity. Accountability in research, 18(2), 71–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296</nowiki> </ref><ref>Science Europe. (2016). Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe member Organisations. <nowiki>https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/</nowiki> </ref> These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Learn about the approach of this guide
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.

Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.

To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:

- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’

- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrity

Facilitation for using existing research ethics and integrity training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on evaluating effectiveness
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programmes achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.

Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:

1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),

2. learning (knowledge, content),

3. behaviour (acting in the research community),

4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for Evaluation Training Programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26.</ref><ref>Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. ''Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22''(3), 215–225. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7]</ref>

Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different times to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:

• during the training (learning process),

• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,

• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)

It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build a culture of integrity.

Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2). By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training
!Tool for collecting learning outputs
!Details
!Analysis instrument
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''''ProLearning'' app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (throughout the training guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=The BEYOND Trainer Guide serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to equip and support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide provides a research-based overview of state-of-the art in teaching research ethics and integrity. According to the extant knowledge base, case-based and collaborative teaching and learning activities, which make use of scaffolding techniques are the best ways to support learning in the context of research ethics and integrity.

This guide provides guidance on how to effectively design teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. It is a comprehensive resource equipped to empower trainers in delivering impactful training sessions. Trainers can adapt and personalize it based on their specific audience, training context, and personal style. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions. by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.
|Important Because=Teaching research ethics and research integrity is incredibly important for several key reasons including fostering important skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.<ref>ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC</ref><ref>Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2011). The singapore statement on research integrity. Accountability in research, 18(2), 71–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296</nowiki> </ref><ref>Science Europe. (2016). Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe member Organisations. <nowiki>https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/</nowiki> </ref> These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on the goals of RCR education
|Instruction Step Text=The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.

RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.

As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).<ref name=":0">Van Den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., & Prieß-Buchheit, J. (2023). A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(3). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x</nowiki> </ref> Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour); training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content); outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour); and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).

[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).<ref>Kalichman, M. W., & Plemmons, D. K. (2007). Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. ''Academic Medicine, 82''(9), 846–852. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf]</ref>
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Learn about the approach of this guide
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.

Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.

To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:

- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’

- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrity

Facilitation for using existing RE/RI training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on the goals of RCR education
|Instruction Step Text=The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.

RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.

As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).<ref name=":0">Van Den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., & Prieß-Buchheit, J. (2023). A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(3). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x</nowiki> </ref> Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour); training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content); outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour); and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).

[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).<ref>Kalichman, M. W., & Plemmons, D. K. (2007). Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. ''Academic Medicine, 82''(9), 846–852. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf]</ref>
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on evaluating effectiveness
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools (developed in WP4) are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programs achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.

Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:

1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),

2. learning (knowledge, content),

3. behaviour (acting in the research community),

4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for Evaluation Training Programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26.</ref><ref>Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. ''Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22''(3), 215–225. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7]</ref>

Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different time points to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:

• during the training (learning process),

• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,

• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)

It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build the culture of integrity.

Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2) By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training
!Tool for collecting learning outputs
!Details
!Analysis instrument
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''''ProLearning'' app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (thoughout the trainig guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee

2025-11-18T08:42:23Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module introduces the content and '''approach''' of the BEYOND Trainer Guide and provides guidance for developing '''learning goals''' and '''evaluation''' strategies.
|Has Duration=1
|Important For=Early career researchers; Graduate students; Prospective Research Integrity Trainers; Research Ethics Committees; Research integrity trainers; Senior researchers; Supervisors; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee
|Is About=The BEYOND Trainer Guide serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to equip and support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide provides a research-based overview of state-of-the art in teaching research ethics and integrity. According to the extant knowledge base, case-based and collaborative teaching and learning activities, which make use of scaffolding techniques are the best ways to support learning in the context of research ethics and integrity.

This guide provides guidance on how to effectively design teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. It is a comprehensive resource equipped to empower trainers in delivering impactful training sessions. Trainers can adapt and personalise it based on their specific audience, training context, and personal style. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions. by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.
|Important Because=Teaching research ethics and research integrity is important for several key reasons including fostering skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.<ref>ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC</ref><ref>Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2011). The singapore statement on research integrity. Accountability in research, 18(2), 71–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296</nowiki> </ref><ref>Science Europe. (2016). Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe member Organisations. <nowiki>https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/</nowiki> </ref> These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Learn about the approach of this guide
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.

Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.

To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:

- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’

- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrity

Facilitation for using existing research ethics and integrity training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainee
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on evaluating effectiveness
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programmes achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.

Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:

1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),

2. learning (knowledge, content),

3. behaviour (acting in the research community),

4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for Evaluation Training Programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26.</ref><ref>Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. ''Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22''(3), 215–225. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7]</ref>

Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different times to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:

• during the training (learning process),

• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,

• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)

It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build a culture of integrity.

Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2). By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training
!Tool for collecting learning outputs
!Details
!Analysis instrument
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''''ProLearning'' app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (throughout the training guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=The BEYOND Trainer Guide serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to equip and support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide provides a research-based overview of state-of-the art in teaching research ethics and integrity. According to the extant knowledge base, case-based and collaborative teaching and learning activities, which make use of scaffolding techniques are the best ways to support learning in the context of research ethics and integrity.

This guide provides guidance on how to effectively design teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. It is a comprehensive resource equipped to empower trainers in delivering impactful training sessions. Trainers can adapt and personalize it based on their specific audience, training context, and personal style. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions. by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.
|Important Because=Teaching research ethics and research integrity is incredibly important for several key reasons including fostering important skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.<ref>ALLEA (2023) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity – Revised Edition 2023. Berlin. DOI 10.26356/ECOC</ref><ref>Resnik, D. B., & Shamoo, A. E. (2011). The singapore statement on research integrity. Accountability in research, 18(2), 71–75. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.557296</nowiki> </ref><ref>Science Europe. (2016). Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe member Organisations. <nowiki>https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/</nowiki> </ref> These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on the goals of RCR education
|Instruction Step Text=The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.

RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.

As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).<ref name=":0">Van Den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., & Prieß-Buchheit, J. (2023). A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(3). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x</nowiki> </ref> Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour); training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content); outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour); and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).

[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).<ref>Kalichman, M. W., & Plemmons, D. K. (2007). Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. ''Academic Medicine, 82''(9), 846–852. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf]</ref>
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Learn about the approach of this guide
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.

The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.

Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.

To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:

- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’

- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrity

Facilitation for using existing RE/RI training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on the goals of RCR education
|Instruction Step Text=The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.

RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.

As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).<ref name=":0">Van Den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., & Prieß-Buchheit, J. (2023). A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(3). <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x</nowiki> </ref> Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour); training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content); outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour); and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).

[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).<ref>Kalichman, M. W., & Plemmons, D. K. (2007). Reported goals for responsible conduct of research courses. ''Academic Medicine, 82''(9), 846–852. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f78bf]</ref>
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=Reflect on evaluating effectiveness
|Instruction Step Text=The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools (developed in WP4) are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programs achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.

Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:

1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),

2. learning (knowledge, content),

3. behaviour (acting in the research community),

4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).<ref>Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for Evaluation Training Programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26.</ref><ref>Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. ''Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22''(3), 215–225. [https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7]</ref>

Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different time points to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:

• during the training (learning process),

• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,

• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)

It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build the culture of integrity.

Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2) By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training
!Tool for collecting learning outputs
!Details
!Analysis instrument
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''''ProLearning'' app'''
{{!}}''ProLearning'': https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chili/dualt/current-projects/realto/

{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Engagement app'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
{{!}}App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Pre-post texts'''
{{!}}Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Learning diaries'''
{{!}}Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group reports'''
{{!}}Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group discussions'''
{{!}}Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Group dynamics'''
{{!}}''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
{{!}}learning analytics
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Online learning platform'''
{{!}}Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
{{!}}Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
{{!}}statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Retention check'''
{{!}}After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
{{!}}SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''Vignettes'''
{{!}}This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
{{!}}statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
{{!}}-
{{!}}'''National surveys'''
{{!}}Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
{{!}}statistics, REI leadership framework
{{!}}}
Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (thoughout the trainig guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).
<references />
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Guide:D857e22a-342c-48b7-a1d5-a096a2fa1ebd

2025-11-18T08:36:41Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Guide
|Title=BEYOND Trainer Guide
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Guide Goal=The BEYOND Trainer Guide is a solid resource '''for educators''' who want to cultivate a culture of integrity and ethical behaviour in research by fostering responsible conduct of research. It serves as a comprehensive resource for educators seeking to support researchers and research communities with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity.

This Trainer Guide provides guidance on how to effectively design and evaluate teaching activities to foster responsible conduct of research to different target groups, such as students, early career researchers, experienced researchers and supervisors. It draws on prior research on teaching and learning research ethics and integrity and makes use of the vast training resources produced through selected EU-funded projects targeting ethics and integrity. But its core purpose remains clear: to equip trainers with the knowledge, strategies, and resources needed to deliver engaging, informative, and ultimately impactful training sessions by bringing together research-based knowledge about research ethics and integrity teaching and learning, trainings produced in several EU-funded projects, and templates and activities for adapting materials to various target groups.

These elements have been carefully crafted to stimulate deep engagement with the ethical dimensions inherent in every stage of the research process, from conception to dissemination of results, and at all career stages. Trainers are provided with tools that promote a culture of accountability and integrity and encourage researchers to uphold ethical principles not only in their research endeavours, but also in their interactions with colleagues, participants, and the broader academic community.

In essence, the guide serves as a '''comprehensive resource for educators''' seeking to equip researchers with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to conduct research ethically and with integrity. By fostering critical reflection, ethical decision-making, and responsible behaviour, educators play a critical role in training the next generation of researchers who are committed to the highest ethical standards in their work.

<div class="video-button" data-href="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LWjoBVl7raY">
The BEYOND Trainer Guide
2:46 min
</div>
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Guide List Wrapper Trainee Open}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Section
|Guide Step Section=Introduction
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Section
|Guide Step Section=Define the learning objectives and teaching methods
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Section
|Guide Step Section=Learn About Existing Training Materials Used in this Guide
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Selecting Appropriate Material and Effectiveness Measurement Tools for your Target Audience
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Section
|Guide Step Section=Build your own training by learning about available resources
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e
}}
{{Guide Step Trainee
|Guide Step Type Trainee=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618
}}
{{Guide List Wrapper Trainee Close}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Guide List Wrapper Trainer Open}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Section
|Guide Step Section=Introduction
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Section
|Guide Step Section=Define the learning objectives and teaching methods
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Section
|Guide Step Section=Learn About Existing Training Materials Used in this Guide
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Selecting Appropriate Material and Effectiveness Measurement Tools for your Target Audience
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Section
|Guide Step Section=Build your own training by learning about available resources
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e
}}
{{Guide Step Trainer
|Guide Step Type Trainer=Instruction
|Guide Step Element=Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618
}}
{{Guide List Wrapper Trainer Close}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}

Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112

2025-01-31T08:33:15Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112

2025-01-31T08:26:57Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f

2025-01-31T08:20:47Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Instruction
|Title=Learning about Research Ethics and Integrity Games
|Has Related Initiative=Initiative:667449ef-1c0a-4e06-8374-830c8ad68cb8
|Instruction Goal=This module explores a collection of different research ethics and integrity games that can be used to deepen engagement and reflection.
|Has Duration=1
|Important For=Early career researchers; Graduate students; Prospective Research Integrity Trainers; Undergraduate students
}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainee}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}}
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}}
{{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainer}}
{{Instruction Perspective Trainer
|Is About=This module introduces a collection of research ethics and integrity games developed by EU funded initiatives to deepen engagement with and reflection on research ethics and integrity topics. Research ethics and integrity games provide a dynamic approach to teaching responsible conduct of research. By simulating real-world challenges and dilemmas, these games encourage active participation and critical thinking in a gamified way. They create an engaging learning environment where players can explore complex questions in a safe, informal and interactive setting.

The games presented here can be used within and/or outside of the academic environment. The games presented here have been developed by the following EU-funded initiatives: INTEGRITY, BRIDGE, and VIRT2UE.

For each game developed by each project the target audience is indicated.
|Has Practical Tips=We recommend that trainers and teachers define the needs and skill level of the group to be trained before selecting the game to be used. This is due to the fact that the career stage often does not reflect the level of skills and competences in terms of research ethics and integrity.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=INTEGRITY
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target Audience:''' undergraduate students, early career researchers.''

The [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] project aims to empower students and early career researchers by developing the capacity of participants to identify, consider, and address integrity concerns in research procedures. Empowerment stimulates a pro-active attitude in participants of the courses, helping them to actively address and deal with integrity issues they encounter in their studies or research. The project developed a specific training tool for [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-undergraduate-students/integrity-games/ undergraduate] students, which poses a series of dilemmas about academic integrity.
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=BRIDGE
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target Audience:''' undergraduate and graduate students.''

The training games developed by the [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] use the “gamification” approach to raise awareness and provide very basic knowledge on research integrity for university students. Online, board, role-play and scenario games can be found [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-games/ here].
}}
{{Instruction Step Trainer
|Instruction Step Title=VIRT2UE
|Instruction Step Text='''''Target Audience:''' undergraduate and graduate students, early career researchers, prospective research integrity trainers.''

The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project presents a modified version of the [https://www.eur.nl/over-de-eur/beleid-en-reglementen/integriteit/wetenschappelijke-integriteit/dilemma-game#:~:text=Over%20de%20Dilemma%20Game%20app,professionalisme%20in%20onderzoek%20te%20stimuleren. Dilemma Game] developed by Erasmus University Rotterdam. This exercise supports participants in identifying research integrity principles, virtues and questionable research practices in a hypothetical case. It provides a framework to consider, choose and defend alternative courses of action regarding realistic research integrity dilemmas.
}}
{{Instruction Remarks Trainer
|Has Remarks=This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under GA No 101094714 (University of Oslo). UK participants in BEYOND are supported by UKRI grant number 10062742 (Trilateral Research) and by UKRI grant number 10067440 (Heriot-Watt University). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, Research Executive Agency, or UKRI. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority nor UKRI can be held responsible for them.)
}}
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainer}}
{{Related To
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112; Instruction:238dfd77-9a59-4dec-b498-3e2214ddc1fe; Instruction:55649946-f15f-4c94-89e1-b79dff231c0e; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee; Instruction:126b8806-0cc1-4625-b11b-f60f43ad9f6f; Instruction:Bcec25e1-c0d9-4e1d-b5c3-eb9c13ae3618; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Ee61dfb7-737f-40ff-9568-aa669cd6865c
}}
{{Tags}}

Resource:C386dbba-2f69-4257-89c2-903898cf1f12

2023-07-17T09:37:36Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=ENERI Classroom
|Is About=The ENERI Classroom is an online training and capacity-building platform for research integrity and ethics. The Classroom provides open access to training materials for research integrity and research ethics experts, such as members of research integrity offices and research ethics committees. Most training materials are suitable for online self-learning as well as online or onsite group-learning guided by a facilitator.

The ENERI Classroom addresses four main topics:

*Research integrity
*Research ethics
*Overlapping issues
*Developing infrastructures

Each topic is divided into several learning units so that both learners and teachers can focus on issues they consider particularly important.

The topic ''research integrity'' includes learning units on:

*Research integrity boards and codes of conducts
*Research integrity principles
*Violations of research integrity
*Plagiarism
*Authorship
*Peer review
*Dealing with violations and allegations of misconduct
*Whistleblowing and whistleblower protection
*Mentoring for stronger cultures of integrity.

The topic ''research ethics'' includes learning units on:

*Research ethics committees: main tasks and challenges
*Core principles of research ethics
*Research involving vulnerable groups
*Research in emergency situations
*Biobanks
*Specific aspects of clinical drug trials
*Ethics review in non-medical fields.

The topic ''overlapping issues'' includes learning units on:

*Conflict of interest
*Data protection
*Social responsibility
*Open science
*Mentoring for stronger cultures of integrity.

The topic ''developing infrastructures'' describes crucial components of effective research integrity and research ethics infrastructures and provides guidance on what to consider when introducing new elements to existing research integrity and research ethics systems. In this way, the Classroom shows how countries, regions or institutions wishing to improve their research integrity and research ethics infrastructures can address challenges in a systematic manner.

Each learning unit is structured as follows:

*Learning objectives and introduction
*Key issues
*Regulations and guidelines
*Cases & questions
*Resources
|Important Because=High-quality training of members and staff is an important prerequisite for ensuring that RIOs, RECs and related bodies can perform their tasks competently and thereby help strengthen the science-society nexus and promote ethical research conduct. However, training materials addressing the specific needs of RIOs, RECs and related bodies are scarce and often not openly accessible. The ENERI Classroom helps filling this gap and thus adds an educational component to ongoing initiatives to continuously improve the research integrity and research ethics systems across Europe.
|Important For=Research Integrity Officers; Research integrity trainers; research integrity researchers; Research Ethics Committees; Policy makers; ENRIO member organisations; Ethics committee members
|Has Best Practice=Core parts of the learning pathways are based on case studies because experience has shown that they are particularly suitable to promote knowledge and foster skills conducive to acting ethically and with integrity in research. More specifically, the case studies allow learners to reflect on what they have learned and to apply newly acquired skills to concrete examples. Moreover, learners can assess their knowledge by answering a set of questions and obtaining feedback on their responses via email. Thus, the ENERI Classroom is an interactive and responsive learning platform.

The cases in the resources section on the Embassy as well as the educational scenarios developed by the EnTIRE project that are available in the educational resources section can complement the ENERI Classroom by adding further issues of interest and/or elaborating existing ones.
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://classroom.eneri.eu/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:31c71a72-eaef-4287-8df6-9788d07302fb;Resource:777888d6-6152-44ce-bd15-646bb279e521;Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a;Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70;Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674;Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3;Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead;Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183;Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4;Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6
|Related To Theme=Theme:8c79e235-8481-45ea-bb57-c744dedbbb8a;Theme:B4f3369c-e0ac-4cf5-acd9-cb2a6c11181d
|Related To Instruction=Instruction:A440eed0-f9f4-4415-a2c4-2d6ff9f44b80;Instruction:6b129846-c455-4849-9eaf-0d25f3c5600e;Instruction:41bc2a1d-26f7-49f9-8bf7-9fc6b4ecf10c;Instruction:C0cf8cfb-6090-49e3-94f5-20f530f83ffd;Instruction:6cc77174-4f7b-48a6-95f3-eeb4dadcb0a3;Instruction:Ffff98bc-b81b-43ee-8fef-a264c1e25741
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=EUREC; ENERI; ENRIO
|Has Timepoint=2019
|Has Location=Europe
|Has Virtue And Value=Integrity; RE in general
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Research Integrity; Research ethics
}}

Resource:Dcd40f8f-20fc-4cfc-8a0b-5c78c606a08b

2022-12-01T13:53:58Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Infographic-SOPs4RI Research integrity guidelines for research funders
|Is About=This resource gives a comprehensive overview of RI-related guidelines useful for research funding organization during the entire funding process.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/wp-content/uploads/SOPs4RI_Infographic_RFOs_RGB_.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:22745e2d-9d86-4d56-97e4-8972583864b4;Resource:5cff0a7f-1560-437b-9d6e-9356a7d105e3;Resource:49516591-7c46-4742-a2ea-171393308432
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:Dc1ed216-1d37-49a9-9725-2b34e90b3ede;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:49516591-7c46-4742-a2ea-171393308432

2022-12-01T13:53:28Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=SOPs4RI Guidelines for research funders on the selection and evaluation of proposals
|Is About=This resource contains a specific guideline for Research Funding Organizations focusing on the selection and evaluation of proposals. This guideline focuses on promoting ''research integrity practices'' during the granting process.
|Important Because=These guidelines address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to responsibly select and evaluate proposals. They address how to tackle research integrity, methodological, and diversity and inclusion considerations during the funding proposal selection and evaluation process. While research funders already have established procedures for selecting and evaluating proposals, these guidelines can serve as inspiration to help research funders develop internal procedures that specifically address research integrity and quality considerations in their selection and evaluation process. The guidelines can also help funders develop external guidelines to inform beneficiaries of their expectations towards them. Consideration of research integrity and quality in funders’ grant selection and evaluation process plays a crucial role in incentivizing responsible research, and thereby fostering research integrity. These guidelines were designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guidelines should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as tools that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Policy makers; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/tool/guidelines-for-research-funders-on-the-selection-and-evaluation-of-proposals/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:5cff0a7f-1560-437b-9d6e-9356a7d105e3

2022-12-01T13:52:56Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=SOPs4RI Guidelines for research funders on monitoring funded projects
|Is About=The guidelines on monitoring of funded projects address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to monitor the execution of research grants with regards to scientific, research integrity and financial aspects.
|Important Because=The guidelines on monitoring of funded projects address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to monitor the execution of research grants with regards to scientific, research integrity and financial aspects. Most research funding organizations already have policies on monitoring funded projects; however, these guidelines can serve as inspiration to help research funders develop internal guidelines about the entire monitoring process, as well as external guidelines to inform beneficiaries of funders’ expectations towards them. The monitoring process can help research funders and governmental institutions to think about the structural problems that make compliance difficult for the beneficiaries. These guidelines were designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guidelines should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as tools that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/tool/guidelines-for-research-funders-on-monitoring-funded-projects/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:66ccb878-3c99-4e54-931d-d718bc0cb246;Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:22745e2d-9d86-4d56-97e4-8972583864b4

2022-12-01T13:52:26Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=SOPs4RI Guidelines for research funders on defining and preventing unjustified interferences from funders, political and commercial actors
|Is About=The recommendations in this guideline concern what measures research funding organizations can take to define unjustified interferences, ensuring transparency and integrity in their procedures, and preventing unjustified interferences by funders themselves, political, and commercial actors.
|Important Because=Independence and the avoidance of unjustifiable interference are key considerations to address in creating a Research Integrity Promotion Plan for research funders. Independence and transparency in the research and funding process are ultimately about the integrity and trustworthiness of research outputs and are, therefore, vital for the research funder to uphold and protect. This guideline provides key recommendations to guide and empower research funders as they work to develop or enhance their own governance frameworks and Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guideline concerns unjustifiable interferences, by which we mean any financial, professional, or other interests of any stakeholder involved, that might negatively influence a decision or be affected by the outcome of a decision. The recommendations in this guideline concern what measures research funding organizations can take to define unjustified interferences, ensuring transparency and integrity in their procedures, and preventing unjustified interferences by funders themselves, political, and commercial actors. The guideline was designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guideline should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as a tool that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/tool/guidelines-for-research-funders-on-defining-and-preventing-unjustified-interferences-from-funders-political-and-commercial-actors/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:A6b06cb6-13ec-4d48-9f1e-efc84449f501;Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320;Theme:2f1668e3-c46b-44b0-bf6a-fc4698b671ca;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:Dcd40f8f-20fc-4cfc-8a0b-5c78c606a08b

2022-11-18T15:33:52Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Infographic-Research integrity guidelines for research funders
|Is About=This resource gives a comprehensive overview of RI-related guidelines useful for research funding organization during the entire funding process.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/wp-content/uploads/SOPs4RI_Infographic_RFOs_RGB_.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:22745e2d-9d86-4d56-97e4-8972583864b4;Resource:5cff0a7f-1560-437b-9d6e-9356a7d105e3;Resource:49516591-7c46-4742-a2ea-171393308432
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:Dc1ed216-1d37-49a9-9725-2b34e90b3ede;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:Dcd40f8f-20fc-4cfc-8a0b-5c78c606a08b

2022-11-18T14:41:53Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Research integrity guidelines for research funders
|Is About=This resource gives a comprehensive overview of RI-related guidelines useful for research funding organization during the entire funding process.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/wp-content/uploads/SOPs4RI_Infographic_RFOs_RGB_.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:22745e2d-9d86-4d56-97e4-8972583864b4;Resource:5cff0a7f-1560-437b-9d6e-9356a7d105e3;Resource:49516591-7c46-4742-a2ea-171393308432
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:Dc1ed216-1d37-49a9-9725-2b34e90b3ede;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:49516591-7c46-4742-a2ea-171393308432

2022-11-18T14:41:20Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Guidelines for research funders on the selection and evaluation of proposals
|Is About=This resource contains a specific guideline for Research Funding Organizations focusing on the selection and evaluation of proposals. This guideline focuses on promoting ''research integrity practices'' during the granting process.
|Important Because=These guidelines address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to responsibly select and evaluate proposals. They address how to tackle research integrity, methodological, and diversity and inclusion considerations during the funding proposal selection and evaluation process. While research funders already have established procedures for selecting and evaluating proposals, these guidelines can serve as inspiration to help research funders develop internal procedures that specifically address research integrity and quality considerations in their selection and evaluation process. The guidelines can also help funders develop external guidelines to inform beneficiaries of their expectations towards them. Consideration of research integrity and quality in funders’ grant selection and evaluation process plays a crucial role in incentivizing responsible research, and thereby fostering research integrity. These guidelines were designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guidelines should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as tools that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Policy makers; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/tool/guidelines-for-research-funders-on-the-selection-and-evaluation-of-proposals/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:5cff0a7f-1560-437b-9d6e-9356a7d105e3

2022-11-18T14:40:55Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Guidelines for research funders on monitoring funded projects
|Is About=The guidelines on monitoring of funded projects address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to monitor the execution of research grants with regards to scientific, research integrity and financial aspects.
|Important Because=The guidelines on monitoring of funded projects address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to monitor the execution of research grants with regards to scientific, research integrity and financial aspects. Most research funding organizations already have policies on monitoring funded projects; however, these guidelines can serve as inspiration to help research funders develop internal guidelines about the entire monitoring process, as well as external guidelines to inform beneficiaries of funders’ expectations towards them. The monitoring process can help research funders and governmental institutions to think about the structural problems that make compliance difficult for the beneficiaries. These guidelines were designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guidelines should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as tools that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/tool/guidelines-for-research-funders-on-monitoring-funded-projects/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:66ccb878-3c99-4e54-931d-d718bc0cb246;Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:22745e2d-9d86-4d56-97e4-8972583864b4

2022-11-18T14:40:30Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Guidelines for research funders on defining and preventing unjustified interferences from funders, political and commercial actors
|Is About=The recommendations in this guideline concern what measures research funding organizations can take to define unjustified interferences, ensuring transparency and integrity in their procedures, and preventing unjustified interferences by funders themselves, political, and commercial actors.
|Important Because=Independence and the avoidance of unjustifiable interference are key considerations to address in creating a Research Integrity Promotion Plan for research funders. Independence and transparency in the research and funding process are ultimately about the integrity and trustworthiness of research outputs and are, therefore, vital for the research funder to uphold and protect. This guideline provides key recommendations to guide and empower research funders as they work to develop or enhance their own governance frameworks and Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guideline concerns unjustifiable interferences, by which we mean any financial, professional, or other interests of any stakeholder involved, that might negatively influence a decision or be affected by the outcome of a decision. The recommendations in this guideline concern what measures research funding organizations can take to define unjustified interferences, ensuring transparency and integrity in their procedures, and preventing unjustified interferences by funders themselves, political, and commercial actors. The guideline was designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guideline should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as a tool that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs.
|Important For=Funders; Funding agencies; Funding institutions; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://sops4ri.eu/tool/guidelines-for-research-funders-on-defining-and-preventing-unjustified-interferences-from-funders-political-and-commercial-actors/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db;Theme:A6b06cb6-13ec-4d48-9f1e-efc84449f501;Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320;Theme:2f1668e3-c46b-44b0-bf6a-fc4698b671ca;Theme:847b9778-3589-42fc-9a7e-5d2d7c92402e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=SOPs4RI
}}

Resource:Dcd40f8f-20fc-4cfc-8a0b-5c78c606a08b

2022-11-18T13:35:47Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Research integrity guidelines for research funders |Is About=This resource gives a comprehensive overview of RI-related guidelines..."

Resource:22745e2d-9d86-4d56-97e4-8972583864b4

2022-11-18T13:29:52Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Guidelines for research funders on defining and preventing unjustified interferences from funders, political and commercial actors..."

Resource:5cff0a7f-1560-437b-9d6e-9356a7d105e3

2022-11-18T13:27:30Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Guidelines for research funders on monitoring funded projects |Is About=The guidelines on monitoring of funded projects address res..."

Resource:49516591-7c46-4742-a2ea-171393308432

2022-11-18T13:24:53Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Guidelines for research funders on the selection and evaluation of proposals |Is About=This resource contains a specific guideline..."

Resource:B5efc1b9-af8c-4dd5-9b6b-0e326a150b9e

2021-12-07T15:11:11Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=Reproducibility and Replicability in Science |Is About=One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity o..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Reproducibility and Replicability in Science
|Is About=One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity of a new scientific discovery is by repeating the research that produced it. When a scientific effort fails to independently confirm the computations or results of a previous study, some fear that it may be a symptom of a lack of rigor in science, while others argue that such an observed inconsistency can be an important precursor to new discovery.
|Important For=Academic staff; All stakeholders in research
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25303/reproducibility-and-replicability-in-science
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:5aefe751-0a20-4597-98a5-a59bf06a987a
|Related To Theme=Theme:46e89570-c93b-41ca-9ac7-d78826bdfad8
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=National Academy of Sciences
|Has Timepoint=2019
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Reproducability; Reproducibility
}}

Resource:F4e04b5c-ae42-49e7-ad6c-e96034e04b31

2021-12-07T15:01:38Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=DATA MINDFULNESS: Making the most of your dissertation |Is About=This resource is structured following the journey you will go throu..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=DATA MINDFULNESS: Making the most of your dissertation
|Is About=This resource is structured following the journey you will go through, from thinking of a research question to writing up and dealing with your dissertation after submission. Keep in mind that this resource has been designed to suit all students from the University, and so there may be sections that are more or less relevant to your specific discipline. Additionally, this is only a starting point to get you thinking about your dissertation
|Important For=Bachelor students; Master students; Doctoral students
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/atoms/files/data_mindfulness-making_the_most_of_your_dissertation_handbook_-_v4.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:B47afc7d-44d6-4713-a209-953d58e81778
|Related To Theme=Theme:67a453dc-7fa0-4f58-a869-748fea8dec7f
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=University of Edinburgh
|Has Timepoint=2021
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Data Management
}}

Resource:7d8a979d-93f1-4612-a450-d353650547bd

2021-10-26T14:24:11Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Cases |Title=Ethics unwrapped collection |Is About=More than 50 case studies match ethics concepts to real world situations. From journalism to perfo..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Ethics unwrapped collection
|Is About=More than 50 case studies match ethics concepts to real world situations. From journalism to performing arts to foreign policy to scientific research to social work, these cases explore a range of current and historic ethical dilemmas, their motivating biases, and their consequences.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-studies
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=McComb School of Business
|Has Location=United States
}}

Resource:Dd39a831-f770-451f-bf63-82acaa055329

2021-02-03T10:05:56Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Cases |Title=What my retraction taught me |Is About=The manuscript published on Nature is on researcher 'self-reflection on the retraction of one of..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=What my retraction taught me
|Is About=The manuscript published on Nature is on researcher 'self-reflection on the retraction of one of his paper.
|Important For=Academic staff; All stakeholders in research; Early career researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00073-4
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0;Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c
}}
{{Tags
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:A6de09c9-d4aa-4723-bd4f-ae8e83887d35

2020-12-23T10:23:51Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Best Practice Guide for Research Integrity and Ethics |Is About=The Austrian Higher Education Conference published a new Best Pract..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Best Practice Guide for Research Integrity and Ethics
|Is About=The Austrian Higher Education Conference published a new Best Practice Guide for Research Integrity and Ethic. The guide for research integrity and ethics presented here is a compilation of standards for good research practice and principles of research ethics.
|Important Because=The position paper presented here takes this into consideration by addressing the responsibility of the researchers and the research institutions. In its examination of the general normative principles of the research process and through its recommendations on specific best practices, these guidelines for good research practice are intended to contribute to raising awareness of research integrity and research ethics in Austria and ensuring the freedom of researchers.
|Important For=Academic staff; All stakeholders in research; Policy makers; Research performing organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://oeawi.at/en/events/best-practice-guide-for-research-integrity-and-ethics/
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Austrian Higher Education Conference; OEAWI
}}

Resource:A76fc0c7-2305-4e4a-8ead-122b61bd59c8

2020-12-22T10:24:24Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=Path2Integrity Handbook |Is About=The purpose of the Handbooks is to guide future researchers into integrating their knowledge in a..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Path2Integrity Handbook
|Is About=The purpose of the Handbooks is to guide future researchers into integrating their knowledge in a coherent and unique research activities. Additionally, by using the learning cards together with the respective Handbook, one can better understand the importance of reliable research.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Early career researchers; Junior researchers; Research integrity trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials#Handbooks
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:C13f2fea-2e63-4da9-8b9a-e4039c3dfde1;Resource:330755f2-6062-4b94-bb9c-a2f0afcf09ce
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Path2Integrity
}}

Resource:C13f2fea-2e63-4da9-8b9a-e4039c3dfde1

2020-12-22T10:22:00Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=Path2Integrity Learning Cards |Is About=With the Path2Integrity learning cards for research integrity, secondary school students and..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Path2Integrity Learning Cards
|Is About=With the Path2Integrity learning cards for research integrity, secondary school students and bachelor students, master students and early career researchers are sensitised for the topic and get to learn what it means that good research is based on honesty. Through the use of the dialogical method, students actively deal with research integrity questions in role play and storytelling. They engage in real-life examples and acquire competencies that are necessary for the development and use of reliable research results and finally for establishing a culture of research integrity.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Master students; Early career researchers; Junior researchers; Research integrity trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials#LearningCards
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Path2Integrity
}}

Resource:4e4f47a0-37af-4ffe-afe4-0d0e968d9a32

2020-12-22T09:41:57Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=PRBB Code of Good Scientific Practice |Is About=The Code of Good Scientific Practice constitutes a framework for self-regulation. T..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=PRBB Code of Good Scientific Practice
|Is About=The Code of Good Scientific Practice constitutes a framework for self-regulation. The content has been supervised and updated as part of the remit of the PRBB Good Scientific Practice Working Group (GSP Working Group).The GSP Working Group is made up of nominated representatives of all PRBB Centres
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Research Integrity Officers; RIO; ENRIO member organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://prbbgoodpractice.wordpress.com/the-code/
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Barcelona Biomedical Research Park (PRBB)
}}

Resource:08561123-adfc-46b5-807f-0f0d02be7f9c

2020-12-22T09:27:35Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Other |Title=Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct |Is About=The publication is called a Handbook. It is a kind of consensus d..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Other
|Title=Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct
|Is About=The publication is called a Handbook. It is a kind of consensus document although representing different views on different topics reflecting a diversified European picture when it comes to experiences and lessons learned. The Handbook has a set of “practical step by step” recommendations or things to consider when dealing with possible research misconduct or unaccepted practices.
|Important Because=The Handbook might be of help answering to questions related to how to deal with misconduct cases.

How should research misconduct be defined and how will it differ from unacceptable research practices? How should allegations be handled? What if an allegation involves several institutions and/or researchers in different countries? Why is it important to have a formal research integrity system in each European country to deal with research misconduct and is there any best model? Where should countries with no RI structures start? Should responsibility be local or national? What about openness and transparency versus confidentiality when dealing with possible misconduct cases?

 
|Important For=Research Integrity Officers; ENRIO member organisations; Administrators; Ethics committee members; Research funding organisations
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://eneri.eu/ri-handbook/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:31c71a72-eaef-4287-8df6-9788d07302fb;Resource:777888d6-6152-44ce-bd15-646bb279e521
|Related To Theme=Theme:8c79e235-8481-45ea-bb57-c744dedbbb8a
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=ENERI
}}

Resource:31c71a72-eaef-4287-8df6-9788d07302fb

2020-12-22T09:20:59Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=ENERI Decision Tree |Is About=With the ENERI decision tree, researchers can be helped to think about ethical questions and challeng..."

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=ENERI Decision Tree
|Is About=With the ENERI decision tree, researchers can be helped to think about ethical questions and challenges that might arise during a planned research project.
|Important Because=Users will find guidelines, codes and other helpful references for many different research areas, guiding them through a proper ethical reflection. Based on the relevant information the user can decide which parts of the planned research project require ethical reflection and taking into account existing national specificities, it is then up to the user to find the appropriate best solutions to deal with the identified ethical implications based on the national context, EU and international regulations and standards.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Research Integrity Officers; Research integrity trainers; research integrity researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://eneri.eu/decision-tree/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:8c79e235-8481-45ea-bb57-c744dedbbb8a
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=ENERI
}}

Resource:284e1f65-113c-48f4-a49f-100da0197176

2020-10-15T08:42:04Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Responsible conduct of biomedical research : collaborative research
|Is About=The resource highlights the importance of collaboration and collaborative research in biomedical sciences. Collaboration in science has to take into consideration a large spectrum of responsible practices in line with the responsible conduct of research
|Important Because=The resource is important to give an overview of all RI-related problems concerning collaboration in biomedical sciences
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Early career researchers; PI; Research Integrity Officers; medical researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnBPxhCq-FY
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70;Resource:Ac0c4548-69f6-4595-9553-15b2f70f0ae8
|Related To Theme=Theme:Cbe88760-7f0e-4d6d-952b-b724bb0f375e;Theme:72c8ab8d-bbf8-4503-8b48-9de7eac37673;Theme:307c6cc0-20d5-432f-bc4a-51aff0c985fe
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=University of Puerto Rico
|Has Timepoint=2010
|Has Location=Puerto Rico
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Fairness; Honesty; Professional courtesy and fairness
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship; Collaborative research; Fairness
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:47bfd883-c518-4a97-98fb-86b5cf442d3e

2020-09-15T13:16:33Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Reproducibility training
|Is About=The video series is about the main issues related to the so-called reproducibility crisis.
|Important Because=These videos should be viewed as a starting point for discussions about best practices for designing experiments and how to relate them to the research environment.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training/instruction-responsible-conduct-research-postdoc-irta-crta-vf-research-0
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:9c917ab2-c01d-446b-89c1-a9cd415afb00;Resource:53a9f1ac-b7f0-41de-9ce1-c715c906c133
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=National Institute of Health
|Has Location=United States
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Reproducability; Data management
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:8f9e6e48-0529-4eb4-9e81-495fffa10688

2020-09-15T12:28:18Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Integrity in scientific research videos
|Is About=This video series will introduce key topics and ethical dilemmas in the responsible conduct of research. These videos are about research integrity-related issues amongst the most common within the research environment at all career level.
|Important Because=These videos are important to foster reflection and discussion about research integrity principles.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Academic staff; Research integrity trainers; research integrity researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://ori.hhs.gov/integrity-scientific-research-videos
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:7f3a037e-4720-4564-ae17-e6a2a92adac5;Resource:91c45880-ddbe-4c96-a95d-6f140b463b96
|Related To Theme=Theme:Cbe88760-7f0e-4d6d-952b-b724bb0f375e;Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39;Theme:A22bd155-7f88-4750-aa9c-cba9ad72cbec;Theme:Ab4200ca-c14d-413d-a9f6-aa5a93e1800e
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=ORI
|Has Location=United States
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship; Mentor/trainee relationship; Grant applications; Research misconduct
}}

Resource:Ae1b3645-f7f2-4c55-a09d-c24935fd73db

2020-09-04T13:21:11Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Image manipulation research
|Is About=The video provides a brief introduction about problematics related to image manipulation. This video explains the research on image manipulation in the Humboldt-Elsevier Advanced Data and Text Center in Berlin.
|Important Because=Image manipulation is just another form of fabrication or falsification. As such, it has to be considered as much as a form of misconduct. Raising awareness about this practice within the scientific community, especially among young researchers, is an important preventive measure.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Academic staff; Research integrity trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=68&v=2i8vuEVyMK4
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:Ae1b3645-f7f2-4c55-a09d-c24935fd73db;Resource:E11c2017-febf-4986-a02a-4d6d9599d21a
|Related To Theme=Theme:88b73549-fec0-4fb9-99f6-fe1055d6b76a;Theme:81c131bb-58e4-42ef-97e6-97e0476f3731
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=HEADT centre Berlin
|Has Timepoint=2018
|Has Location=Germany
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Image manipulation
}}

Resource:Ce9f4154-89ea-433e-9fd4-523245263256

2020-09-04T09:35:04Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=COPE seminar, webinar and ppt presentation
|Is About=These educational recourses provide recording of COPE seminars, webinars and COPE PPT presentations. They can serve as introduction regarding all research integrity issues related to publication ethics.
|Important Because=These resources give a clear overview about the major challenges regarding publication ethics. Challenges that all people (in)directly involved in the research are obliged to confront with. Publication pressure and other factors
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Peer reviewers; Research integrity trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://publicationethics.org/resources/seminars-and-webinars
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:E3a1be4e-2ff9-4b7f-b44c-abd409fe225a;Resource:A0df9be7-401a-43ba-af41-245019119182;Resource:55cea558-b370-4eec-b4f5-0de97f815e67;Resource:38cabc43-2b53-4c98-80ea-89b97ef5107d;Resource:Aea9471a-e48b-4fe0-8df4-8013763c4b08;Resource:Fa937813-9987-4ceb-a69e-373cc876e476
|Related To Theme=Theme:72c8ab8d-bbf8-4503-8b48-9de7eac37673;Theme:A22bd155-7f88-4750-aa9c-cba9ad72cbec;Theme:540f8241-c354-4249-8b63-6bdc2e74bdf8;Theme:3a32df5c-e6e8-45f9-8132-434db3985a65;Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=COPE; Editorial Board Member for Research Integrity & Peer Review
|Has Location=United Kingdom
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Publication ethics
}}

Resource:Ce9f4154-89ea-433e-9fd4-523245263256

2020-09-04T09:34:29Z

0000-0003-3954-5924:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=COPE seminar, webinar and ppt presentation
|Is About=This educational recourses provide recording of COPE seminars, webinars and PPT presentations. They can serve as introduction regarding all research integrity issues related to publication ethics.
|Important Because=These resources give a clear overview about the major challenges regarding publication ethics. Challenges that all people (in)directly involved in the research are obliged to confront with. Publication pressure and other factors
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Peer reviewers; Research integrity trainers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://publicationethics.org/resources/seminars-and-webinars
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:E3a1be4e-2ff9-4b7f-b44c-abd409fe225a;Resource:A0df9be7-401a-43ba-af41-245019119182;Resource:55cea558-b370-4eec-b4f5-0de97f815e67;Resource:38cabc43-2b53-4c98-80ea-89b97ef5107d;Resource:Aea9471a-e48b-4fe0-8df4-8013763c4b08;Resource:Fa937813-9987-4ceb-a69e-373cc876e476
|Related To Theme=Theme:72c8ab8d-bbf8-4503-8b48-9de7eac37673;Theme:A22bd155-7f88-4750-aa9c-cba9ad72cbec;Theme:540f8241-c354-4249-8b63-6bdc2e74bdf8;Theme:3a32df5c-e6e8-45f9-8132-434db3985a65;Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=COPE; Editorial Board Member for Research Integrity & Peer Review
|Has Location=United Kingdom
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Publication ethics
}}

User:0000-0003-3954-5924

2020-09-04T09:07:43Z

0000-0003-3954-5924: create user page