Text (Instruction Step Text)
From The Embassy of Good Science
Describe the actions the user should take to experience the material (including preparation and follow up if any). Write in an active way.
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
2
<span lang="EN-US">A PhD candidate is new to a laboratory, and they face some conflict with a peer when it comes to booking the laboratory space and equipment. This scenario is focused on how to work together collaboratively and how to handle misunderstandings.</span> +
Look back at the 5 phases of care by Toronto and think about your research. How could you reflect on and integrate the 5 phases of care in your research? You can think about your research design or a specific phase of your research.
For inspiration you can look at [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09650792.2018.1450771?utm_source=researchgate.net&medium=article this article] where a research group describes in detail how they have integrate the and reflected upon the 5 phases of care in their research.[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09650792.2018.1450771?utm_source=researchgate.net&medium=article]
[[File:5 phases.png|center|frameless|600x600px]] +
In the context of planetary health, ''justice'' means recognising that the impacts of environmental degradation and climate change are not distributed equally. While some communities contribute more to these problems, often through overconsumption or industrial activity, others (especially low-income or marginalised groups) bear the brunt of the consequences.
Justice asks us to reflect on questions such as:
*Who benefits from current systems?
*Who is most affected by environmental and health harms?
*Whose voices are included or excluded from solutions?
Justice is essential for sustainable health systems because '''no system can be truly sustainable if it perpetuates inequality.''' +
We rarely think about the environmental cost of streaming a movie, joining a video call, or downloading a podcast— but the digital world runs on data centers that use huge amounts of energy, water, and land. +
Laboratories are very energy intensive. In this session, you will explore practical, daily actions that can significantly reduce the energy loads in lab spaces. The video “'''Saving energy in your lab'''” discusses how energy is used in a lab and offers tips on how energy use can be reduced.
'''Watch this video to learn about actions that can reduce energy base- and peak load and reflect on potential challenges related to implementation actions aimed at enhancing efficient energy use in labs.''' +
<div>
<span lang="EN-US">After reading the text below, complete each blank by selecting the most appropriate word from the list provided. This activity is designed to help you reflect on how these skills contribute to addressing complex sustainability challenges and improving problem-solving in engineering contexts.You may find it helpful to review the key concept definitions below before completing the activity.A wicked problem is a complex and difficult-to-define challenge that involves multiple stakeholders, competing values, and interconnected factors. These problems do not have a single correct solution, and attempts to address one aspect may create new challenges. Sustainability is often considered a wicked problem because it requires balancing environmental, social, and economic considerations.</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Perspective taking is the ability to temporarily adopt and understand the viewpoints of others in a purposeful and cognitive way. It helps engineers explore different stakeholder needs and constraints, improves how problems are framed, and supports ethical reasoning and negotiation between competing perspectives. Developing perspective-taking skills enables engineers to design more inclusive and sustainable solutions.</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Systems thinking is a way of reasoning that involves understanding how components of a system interact and produce outcomes. It allows engineers to analyze complex phenomena, recognize relationships and interdependencies, and predict potential consequences. Systems thinking is particularly important for sustainability, as it helps engineers consider broader contexts and make informed decisions about complex systems.</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Negotiation is the process of balancing different stakeholder interests to reach informed and mutually acceptable solutions. In engineering, negotiation involves mediating between diverse perspectives, optimizing available resources, and advocating for stakeholders who cannot represent themselves, such as the environment. Strong negotiation skills are essential for addressing sustainability challenges effectively.</span>
</div>
After carefully reviewing the slideshow, answer the questions to test your understanding of degrowth, postgrowth, and their main social and environmental priorities. +
<div>
<span lang="EN-US">Next, click through the various ecofeminist research dilemmas and choose how you would respond to them. There is no right or wrong answer ''per se'', you can also go through this multiple times to see different outcomes. This is just to get you thinking about various research dilemmas and the principles discussed above!</span>
</div> +
Now that you have learned about environmental justice, we invite you to reflect on your research by answering the questions below. +
This step explores the environmental impacts of generative AI across its lifecycle: from training, deployment, and inference to hardware and infrastructure.
You can expand the image by clicking on the button on the bottom right-hand corner. +
Based on what you learned from the video, please reflect on your understanding of how ecological fieldwork can be performed responsibly by matching the actions with their corresponding type of sampling, including study design, vegetation sampling, soil sampling, and wildlife sampling.
You can expand the image by clicking on the button on the bottom right-hand corner. +
<span lang="EN-US">Listen to the podcast that you opened focussing on the following fragments: [2:16–4:00], [6:28–8:23]</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Pay attention to how Laura del Duca defines different types of justice.</span> +
Core AI Concepts +
<span lang="EN-US">The [https://osf.io/pn27g Reproducibility Management Plan (RMP) Pilot] aims to create a prototype of key thematic subjects and questions that will serve as the starting point to support reproducibility at the planning stage of research. Work involves defining what an RMP is, integrating it into the ARGOS service, and testing its effectiveness with feedback from the community. The pilot addresses researchers, beneficiaries and funders for its adoption.</span><div>
Please find the integrated ARGOS tool here: <u>https://argos.openaire.eu/portal/</u><u>.</u>
Downloadable version of the RMP prototype template: [https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fosf.io%2Fa7z9x%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cb.leitner%40amsterdamumc.nl%7C71711775f8024a483ef208de9ef07be0%7C68dfab1a11bb4cc6beb528d756984fb6%7C0%7C0%7C639122952853827480%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=l4dQwkweKHzOmsoxqcI%2Bha6Uw0mttgXrLiBEC7lCM9o%3D&reserved=0 https://osf.io/a7z9x/].
<u><span lang="EN-US">Tutorials on OpenPlato:</span></u>
#<u>'''<span lang="EN-US">ARGOS Service for Admins</span>'''<span lang="EN-US">: https://openplato.eu/course/view.php?id=150</span></u>
#<u>'''<span lang="EN-US">ARGOS Info Pack</span>'''<span lang="EN-US">: https://openplato.eu/course/view.php?id=547</span></u>
#<u>'''<span lang="EN-US">ARGOS Service for Users</span>'''<span lang="EN-US">: https://openplato.eu/course/view.php?id=122</span></u>
</div><div>
<u><span lang="EN-US">Reports on co-creation activities: '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000000-QINU`"'</span></u>
</div> +
Do the following activity and check your understanding and reflect critically. +
<div>
<span lang="EN-US">The micromodules presented in the course can be used individually or as part of a profile-specific learning path. By clicking on the filters at the top of the page learners can select their learning profile and be guided through the resources specifically designed for their target group. Specific profile-specific learning paths have been designed for 4 different stakeholders' group namely:</span>
</div><div>
*<span lang="EN-US">Researchers</span>
</div><div>
*<span lang="EN-US">Students</span>
</div><div>
*<span lang="EN-US">Citizen scientists</span>
</div><div>
*<span lang="EN-US">Ethics reviewers</span>
</div><div>
<span lang="EN-US">The course is designed as a toolbox. This means that learners are not required to take the whole course top to bottom. Learners are welcome to follow the learning paths designed for their target groups but are also given the chance to deepen their knowledge by taking advantage of the other tools present in the toolbox. To find out which modules have been specifically designed for you, please select your target audience via the filtering menu you will find at the top of the course page.</span>
</div> +
Watch the following video and reflect on environmental consideration in and form research. +
<blockquote>"The integrative review presented here examines how reproducibility and replicability are conceptualized and discussed in relation to qualitative research, and which factors and practices enable or undermine them. Both peer-reviewed and grey English-language literature that address reproducibility and/or Open Science in relation to qualitative research were eligible for inclusion. Initial searches were conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, PubMed, APA PsychInfo, and JSTOR, and followed with snowball sampling from included literature. Studies were screened and both quantitative and qualitative data were extracted using the SyRF online platform, with 248 papers included. We found that conceptualizations that stem from quantitative standpoints are overwhelmingly framed as inappropriate practices and epistemic criteria for (most) qualitative research. When conceptualized in alternative ways that are adapted to the epistemic conditions, aims and practices of qualitative research, they can be both applicable and appropriate. Key barriers include the ontological and epistemological misalignment of reproducibility, replicability and Open Science and qualitative research, and ethical and practical concerns surrounding data sharing and reuse. Key enablers include practices that respond to ethical and practical concerns around data sharing and reuse (anonymization, ethical consent practices, context documentation, and ethical access management), adapting expectations and norms of openness, and established qualitative practices including documentation, reflexivity, and considering positionality. We conclude that reproducibility, replicability and Open Science practices must be adapted to the aims and epistemic conditions of qualitative research for them to be applicable and feasible, and that they will not always be both for all qualitative research."
Find the full paper here: [https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/n5zkw_v1 MetaArXiv Preprints - Reproducibility and replicability of qualitative research: an integrative review of concepts, barriers and enablers].</blockquote>
Reference:
Cole, N. L., Ulpts, S., Bochynska, A., Kormann, E., Good, M., Leitner, B., & Ross-Hellauer, T. (2024, December 23). Reproducibility and replicability of qualitative research: an integrative review of concepts, barriers and enablers. '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000001-QINU`"'
Stories help audiences understand complex ideas because they introduce progression and change. Instead of presenting information as isolated facts, stories guide audiences through a sequence that explains how something develops. Importantly, stories are not just sequences of events;they also involve emotional engagement. They are often personal or told from a particular perspective, allowing audiences to connect with the events and understand why they matter. Stories therefore report on a narrative from a specific point of view, which shapes how the audience interprets the event.
Many storytelling approaches rely on simple structures that move from a situation to a disruption and then toward a response or resolution.
For example, the ABT framework (Scicomm Success, n,d) describes stories as:
* AND – describing the current situation
* BUT – introducing a challenge or complication
* THEREFORE – presenting the response or outcome
More generally, stories often include:
* a situation (what is currently happening)
* a disruption (a problem or change)
* a response (what is done about it)
* an outcome (what changes as a result)
These structures are widely used across storytelling contexts to create meaning and coherence. In addition to structure, stories typically include perspective (who is experiencing the events) and emotional stakes (why the vent matter), which help audiences engage with the narrative rather than just understand it intellectually.
Example:
Dr. X had always trusted patterns—they were the quiet logic that made medicine feel steady (situation). So when a small group of patients stopped responding to a treatment that should have helped them, the disruption hit her harder than she expected. The usual explanations felt flimsy, and each dead end left her with a tightening worry that she was missing something vital (disruption).
That worry became a spark. Instead of retreating to familiar variables, she designed a new study that reached into overlooked corners: stress, sleep, microbiomes, isolation, subtle environmental pressures. It was messy work, but it felt alive, like rediscovering the curiosity that first pulled her into research (response).
When the results finally came together, she felt a rush of relief and clarity. The alternative factors didn’t just explain the variation;they revealed a richer, more human picture of why patients diverge.
Her breakthrough didn’t just advance the field. It reminded her that medicine isn’t about perfect patterns, it’s about understanding the people who fall outside them (result).
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/
<span lang="EN-GB"></span>
|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 '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000010-QINU`"'] [https://amsterdamumc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/g_inguaggiato_amsterdamumc_nl/Documents/!Oude%20N%20schijf/Documenten/Beyond/Training%20guide%20V7_GI.docx#_msocom_2 '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000011-QINU`"']
|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]
'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000012-QINU`"' 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).
'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000013-QINU`"' Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
