Difference between revisions of "Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6"
From The Embassy of Good Science
(Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project |Is About=Members of The Embassy o...") |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
| − | |Resource Type= | + | |Resource Type=Scenarios |
|Title=Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project | |Title=Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project | ||
|Is About=Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity. | |Is About=Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
It focuses on issues regarding: | It focuses on issues regarding: | ||
| − | * The obligations of research ethics committee members when it comes to their knowledge of different disciplinary designs, methodologies and analytical tools; | + | *The obligations of research ethics committee members when it comes to their knowledge of different disciplinary designs, methodologies and analytical tools; |
| − | * The obligations to promote and provide training in different research integrity guidelines and standards; | + | *The obligations to promote and provide training in different research integrity guidelines and standards; |
| − | * The relationships between discipline-specific, institutional and national codes of conduct; | + | *The relationships between discipline-specific, institutional and national codes of conduct; |
| − | * The navigation of the differences between discipline-specific, institutional and national codes of conduct; | + | *The navigation of the differences between discipline-specific, institutional and national codes of conduct; |
| − | * Allegations of conflicts of interest; | + | *Allegations of conflicts of interest; |
| − | * The duties and obligations of project coordinators and principal investigators. | + | *The duties and obligations of project coordinators and principal investigators. |
It is interspersed with questions and resource suggestions that help guide researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators in their deliberations concerning the research integrity issues raised by the narrative. | It is interspersed with questions and resource suggestions that help guide researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators in their deliberations concerning the research integrity issues raised by the narrative. | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
{{Related To | {{Related To | ||
|Related To Resource=Resource:5bbdd729-8f96-432a-a0ee-56510e343d01;Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3;Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead;Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a;Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70;Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4;Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674;Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 | |Related To Resource=Resource:5bbdd729-8f96-432a-a0ee-56510e343d01;Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3;Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead;Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a;Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70;Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4;Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674;Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 | ||
| − | |Related To Theme=Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320;Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39 | + | |Related To Theme=Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320;Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39;Theme:8540d0c5-84a0-4c77-9f30-d1be51da0aa4;Theme:639528ea-d2c2-4565-8b44-15bb9646f74b;Theme:721dc5c7-8e47-41ca-a7b8-73d6a225c3c3;Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02;Theme:Bd54dd3d-50ed-4f42-b5fb-473f2391714a;Theme:177ca35b-14f3-4f62-8bb2-f9cf9db28a70;Theme:73bfb9ec-b7f5-4a0a-a0b0-e460990b59cb;Theme:Ab4200ca-c14d-413d-a9f6-aa5a93e1800e |
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
Latest revision as of 14:24, 19 October 2021
ResourcesScenarios
Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project
What is this about?
Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity.
This scenario presents a hypothetical narrative that addresses specific ways in which training, supervision and mentoring practices can undermine the standards of research integrity.
It focuses on issues regarding:
- The obligations of research ethics committee members when it comes to their knowledge of different disciplinary designs, methodologies and analytical tools;
- The obligations to promote and provide training in different research integrity guidelines and standards;
- The relationships between discipline-specific, institutional and national codes of conduct;
- The navigation of the differences between discipline-specific, institutional and national codes of conduct;
- Allegations of conflicts of interest;
- The duties and obligations of project coordinators and principal investigators.
Why is this important?
The scenarios are designed to help researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to become better acquainted with The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity ('ECCRI' or 'ECoC') as a regulatory document that articulates the standards of good research practice.
They also allow users to reflect on and apply their own national and institutional research ethics and research integrity codes as well as other key regulatory documents and guidelines.
The goal is for the user to gain knowledge of the standards associated with good research practices and to make sense of these standards in different research contexts.
According to the ECCRI/ECoC, there are eight categories of research contexts that are covered by the standards of good research practice:
1) Research Environment
2) Training, Supervision and Mentoring
3) Research Procedures
4) Safeguards
5) Data Practices and Management
6) Collaborative Working
7) Publication and Dissemination
8) Reviewing, Evaluating and EditingFor whom is this important?
Academic staffAdministratorsDoctoral studentsPostdocsEarly career researchersEthics committee membersResearch Ethics CommitteesGraduate studentsPhD StudentsJunior researchersProfessorsResearch Integrity OfficersResearchersUniversitiesResearch institutionsSupervisorsPrincipal investigatorsResearch integrity trainers
What are the best practices?
The aim of all eight scenarios is to allow researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to focus their reflection on core principles and research contexts that enshrine good research practice as well as their local rules and practices.
