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
4
A moral question is a situation in which moral duties are clear to the subject, although they may be in conflict with other issues of interest to the agent such as financial and political interests. These situations do not require moral deliberation so much as moral courage. Moral disagreements arise when the agent feels subjectively certain but holds a point of view in conflict with another persons’ moral judgments. These situations call for moral dialogue and argumentation. Finally, moral conflicts (or moral problems) arise when agents face conflicting moral duties. These instances call for moral deliberation. +
Communicate my Early View and associated reasons to the rest of the committee +
02 - The Seven Steps Method: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity +
Be imaginative, try to avoid “dilemma”; not “yes” or “no” but whom to go to, what to say. +
Start a debate: invite both subgroups to convince the other side of their position. As a moderator, you can challenge the participants if only a few people talk. In general, try not to intervene too much during the debate, even when participants start raising their voices. Stop the debate if you see people becoming too emotional and ask them what is triggering them to become emotional in terms of aggression, sadness etc.
In case the participants are debating too politely, you should intervene actively as a moderator and challenge both groups to convince each other. You might even make stimulating comments such as:
**
*Come on, do you really think that …….? (repeat what has been said by one of the participants)
*What makes you think that this argument counts? +
Read about the concept of debate and dialogue and reflect on the differences between the two.
Open the page about [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:6217d06b-c907-4b09-af4e-b4c8a17b9847 dialogue versus debate]. +
a. Ask each trainee to recall the specific situation they experienced (this was part of the assignment prior to this meeting\exercise which you as trainer distributed before to the session). This should be a situation from their own research in which they had concerns about research integrity (or a virtue related to research integrity such as honesty, reliability, accountability), and in which they were morally in doubt about how to act.
b. Ask trainees to select one virtue which was at stake in their specific situation. Ask trainees to check whether and to what degree the virtues/principles mentioned in the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity are relevant here. If so, in which way? If not, why not?
c. Ask trainees to reflect on which behavior does justice to the virtue at stake in the situation. A balancing act is always required to determine the right course of action. To reflect on this, ask participants to reflect on their own situation and imagine a continuum. For example, if courage is the selected virtue:
coward behavior -------------- courageous behavior-------------------- reckless behavior
d. Invite participants to write down three kinds of possible behaviors in relation to the research integrity case, guided by the following questions (please ask the participants to use the handout 1 in the practical tips section):
1) What would you do if your behavior represents too much of the specific virtue? In other words, what would you do concretely if the virtue is too strong (right end of the spectrum)?
2) What would you do if your behavior represents too little of the specific virtue? In other words, what would you do concretely if the virtue which should guide your behavior is not prominent enough (left end of the spectrum)?
3) What would you do if you demonstrated the right behavior which perfectly represents your specific virtue in that situation? This is dependent on your convictions and the particular person you are in that specific context. In this case, your behavior representing the specific virtue will be neither too strong and nor too weak. You stand between both extremes in your actions/thoughts/decisions as a researcher. This is the middle position.
<br />
Introduce yourself. Briefly inform participants about the background, the aim, and the description of the game. Emphasize that the information shared during the exercise should be kept confidential. +
In playing the game, you will read hypothetical cases concerning research integrity dilemmas. You will need to decide which of the four proposed courses of action to take in relation to the dilemmas.
The trainer might share these dilemmas on a slide or flip board, or she/he might make use of the [https://www.eur.nl/en/about-eur/policy-and-regulations/integrity/research-integrity/dilemma-game Dilemma Game app]. If using the app, the trainer will guide you through the following steps:
'''Playing the game (app version)'''
#Input the room code provided by the trainer into the app.
#You will be able to see the first dilemma.
#The trainer will share the dilemma on a screen with you (lecture mode in the app)
#Choose one of the four alternative courses of action which best reflects how you would act in the dilemma
#The facilitator will guide you in a discussion about your choices
<br /> +
What might be the short- as well as the long-range consequences? +
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/YU1bz55jSaEvgLnw4Pry4pj8 Performative Culture in Research]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/gC7DA1ov5dJSedX6PnocZXTJ Cognitive Dissonance and Moral Distress]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/z5LKn1vp1M5ipLne3UP4y34J Why we justify unethical behaviour]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/pxDtEnZcfkUDASj8q8K1FwKX To make a virtue of necessity] +
Trainees will start with the online course, consisting of four modules.
The the instruction texts are listed below for each module separately:
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/JtQY5BoRoy7a2YxRW4FrNtrT Introduction to Research Integrity]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/J9FeNvrxuvBZ6d2uLxDbpQPH Introduction of Virtue Ethics to Research Integrity]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/AEpLMj1ET7GsHP4tUsg9nutn Virtue Ethics under Current Research Conditions]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/qHZkUih5cAERRB5UUQ2JKezJ Introduction to Responsible Supervision, Mentoring and Role-modeling] +
On this course unit you will focus on the topic of open access and intellectual property. The week is divided in three smaller sections:
<br />
*Video "sour and sweet tastes"
*Short lecture on open access and intellectual property
*Apply your knowledge and start working on the final assignment +
In this learning unit, we will focus on collaboration ''outside'' your research team. This can entail a broad range of actors who are not directly involved in the research itself, but who are involved in broader forms of collaboration in relation to your research, like funding agencies, administrators, publishers, editors, policy makers, companies, and societal stakeholders.
Like collaboration within your research team, collaboration outside the research team can influence RCR. Ideally, you discuss this in conversations with your supervisor/mentor.
Below you will find an overview of the content of this learning unit.
[[File:Unit 3.png|center|frame]] +
This module aims to equip students with the knowledge to comprehend the meaning and importance of research integrity. This will be achieved through a practical hands-on approach, where videos about key aspects of genetic tests, followed by fictional cases, outlining research integrity issues in genetic tests research, will be presented. We aim for students to identify and relate such examples of research misconduct and questionable research practices in genetic tests research, with their own practices when doing school assignments. This will engage students in a group discussion and to critically reflect on the importance of acting with responsibility and honesty in their own school work and life. +
In the fourth learning unit, participants learn the basics of writing a Data Management Plan (DMP). At the end of the LU, students make their third and final portfolio assignment. +
Münazara ve diyalog kavramları üzerine okumalar yapabileceğiniz <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:6217d06b-c907-4b09-af4e-b4c8a17b9847 Diyalog ve Münazara] </u>sayfasını açın. +
Eğitmeninizle iletişime geçin ve özdüşünüm formlarınızı teslim edin. İkinci yüz yüze oturumda üzerinde durmak isteyeceğiniz soru ve konuları eğitmeninizle paylaşın. Örneğin: Katılımcılarınızın öğrenme sürecini kolaylaştıran ya da sekteye uğratan şeyler nelerdi? Bir sonraki kolaylaştırma deneyiminizde farklı yapacağınız ya da aynı şekilde yapmaya devam edeceğiniz şeyler neler olurdu? +
İlk oturumun genel amacı, karma öğrenme programının yüz yüze/ katılımlı kısmını oluşturan beş adet alıştırmayı tanıtmak ve eğitimi alanları alıştırmaları kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetmeye hazırlamaktır.
İlk oturumu planlarken:
a. Her bir alıştırma için yeterince zaman ayırın (en az 2 saat).
Eğitmen olarak alıştırmaları önce siz yönetecek ve eğitim verdiğiniz kişilerin alıştırmaları deneyimlemelerini sağlayacaksınız. Sonrasında alıştırmaları bir eğitmen olarak yönetmek için gerekli bilgi ve becerilerin ne olduğunu açıklayacaksınız. Alıştırmalar arasında katılımcıların rahatlaması ve deneyimleri üzerine fikir yürütebilmesi için mola vermeyi unutmayın. Programın nasıl yapılandırıldığına bağlı olarak oturumda yiyecek ve içecek servisi sağlamanız (ya da yakınlardaki restoran ve mağazalara nasıl erişileceğine dair bilgiler vermeniz) gerekebilir.
b. Katılımcıların birinci ve ikinci katılımlı oturumlar arasında neler yapması gerektiğini açıklamak için zaman ayırın. Eğitim uygulamalarını nasıl planlayacakları ya da kendi çalışma ortamlarında eğitecekleri katılımcıların ihtiyaçlarına göre alıştırmalarda uyarlama yapmalarının gerekip gerekmeyeceği üzerine topluca fikir yürütebilmek için de programda yer açmayı düşünebilirsiniz. +
Katılımlı oturumlar arasındaki zamanda gerçekleştirilecek uygulamalar sırasında katılımcıların kafalarında oluşan herhangi bir soru ya da şüpheyle ilgili olarak size danışabilmeleri için iletişim bilgilerinizi paylaşın. Öz beyan formlarının teslim edileceği son tarihi belirleyin ve konuyla ilgili gerekli talimatları verin. Belirlediğiniz tarihin bir sonraki katılımlı oturumdan en az bir hafta önce olması gerekmektedir. +
Münazarayı başlatın: gruplara karşı grubu ikilemin kendi savundukları tarafının en iyi seçenek olduğuna ikna etmelerini söyleyin. Münazara esnasında sadece birkaç kişinin söz alması durumunda moderatör olarak siz de katılımcıları zorlayacak ya da ilgilerini uyandıracak şeyler söyleyebilirsiniz. Genel olarak münazaraya - katılımcılar seslerini yükseltmeye başlasa da - fazla müdahale etmemeye çalışın. Sürecin çok duygusal bir hale geldiği izlenimine kapılırsanız münazarayı sonlandırın ve katılımcılara agresifleşmelerine ya da sinirlenmelerine yol açan şeyin ne olduğunu sorun.
Katılımcıların münazarayı fazla kibar ve medeni biçimde sürdürmesi durumunda ise moderatör olarak aktif müdahalede bulunmanız ve grupları birbirlerini ikna etmeye zorlamanız gerekebilir. Hatta aşağıdakiler gibi tahrik edici yorumlarda da bulunabilirsiniz:
* Yok artık, gerçekten böyle mi düşünüyorsun?
* Bu argümanın geçerli bir argüman olduğunu nerden çıkardın? +
