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
3
[https://www.structural-learning.com/post/scaffolding-in-education-a-teachers-guide Scaffolding] is a teaching technique, which involves providing tailored support to learners based on their current expertise and gradually withdrawing support as they become more proficient. This approach, researched in the context of research ethics and integrity, is used in both face-to-face and online learning environments, including problem-based and inquiry learning.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000070-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000071-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000072-QINU`"' Conceptual scaffolding is crucial in problem-based and inquiry learning, helping learners navigate complex concepts and considering various learning styles. Teachers can adjust academic content to suit learners' abilities. Online courses benefit from personalised learning paths that can be adjusted in real-time. Scaffolding aligns with the idea of Vygotsky's zone of proximal development, that is instruction and facilitation should target the domain where the learner can function with assistance. It is unnecessary to provide scaffolding in domains which the learner already masters, or which are still beyond the learners reach.
When teaching research ethics and integrity, scaffolding entails dissecting difficult ideas into smaller, more digestible chunks and supporting students as they gain knowledge. Scaffolding can be planned into the design of the course teaching/learning activities and the instructions of these, but often opportunities to incorporate scaffolding techniques present themselves ad hoc. In this case, it is important that the trainer is aware of a variety of techniques and recognises situations in which they can be beneficially used to support learning. The steps for incorporating scaffolding include:
#Identifying what the learner already knows, that is, what is their current level and where is the zone of proximal development
#Setting goals, which reflect the learning objectives, for the learner in line with what was determined to be within reach in the prior step
#Planning a suitable breakdown of goals and activities in support of the goals
#Carrying out the training with scaffolding, monitoring of learning and provision of feedback during the learning
#Adjusting the support and gradually decreasing it as the learner progresses towards the goal
#New goals and planning activities as the prior goals are reached
For example the website [https://www.buffalo.edu/catt.html Scaffolding Over Time] prepared by the Office of Curriculum and Teaching Transformation, University of Buffalo provides more information on Scaffolding for the trainer interested in using this technique.
Table 3 presents a scaffolding framework utilised in research ethics training.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000073-QINU`"'
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!'''Scaffolding process'''
!'''Scaffolding mechanism'''
!'''Scaffolding technique'''
!'''Scaffolding purpose'''
!'''Illustrative example'''
|-
| rowspan="6"|SENSE-MAKING
|Problematising
|Hinting
|Give an indirect suggestion or piece of evidence that leads toward a problem solution (Merriam-Webster)
|‘So, the documents pertaining to research ethics and integrity to consult would be…’ (implying that some documents should be consulted)
|-
|Problematising
|Describing the problem to direct focus
|Orient to the important features (Tambaum, 2017)
|‘Indeed, when you have to get an informed consent you should consider various aspects, for example …’
|-
|Structural/ Problematising
|Making fill-in-the-blank kinds of requests
|A statement or a question with a missing component (but some info is given)
|‘A good way to highlight the importance of research integrity would be to ….?’
|-
|Structural/ Problematising
|Asking a leading question (P – why?)
|A question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted
|‘Where can you find the information pertaining to the codes of conduct?’
|-
|Structural
|Providing an example
|Giving an example to illustrate a point
|‘For example, in Europe it is a common practice to consult a research integrity advisor.’
|-
|Structural
|Providing physical props
|Helping to understand by mimicking or showing a visual aid
|‘What do you think are the ethical aspects of designing this item?’ (show e.g. a fork)
|-
| rowspan="6"|PROCESS
MANAGEMENT
|Structural
|Pumping
|Simulating to go further without specific instructions (Tambaum, 2017)
|‘OK, what else?’
|-
|Structural
|Redirecting the learner
|Showing which direction to go, which aspect should be tackled next (especially when seeing that the direction is lost/off)
|‘All right, let’s get back to the track and discuss the next steps of the ethics review process’
|-
|Structural
|Decomposing the task
|Making the bigger task into smaller components
|‘First, think what you know about the ethics review process, then, read the paragraph and finally…’ (give instructions one task after another)
|-
|Structural
|Initiating the reasoning step
|Use the faculty of reason so as to arrive at conclusions
|‘First, think what you know about the ethics review process, then, read the paragraph and finally…’ (give instructions one task after another)
|-
|Structural
|Completing the learners’ reasoning
|‘Splicing in’ the correct answer (Tambaum, 2017)
|(the learner cannot end the thought) ‘... you mean a code of conduct should be consulted?’
|-
|Structural
|Executing parts of the skill
|Do parts of the task for the learner to give an example
|‘OK, so first you consult the ALLEA code of conduct and then …’
|-
| rowspan="3"|ARTICULATION
&
REFLECTION
|Structural
|Maintaining goal orientation
|Reminding the learner of some aspect of the task
|‘Have you also had time to think about …?’
|-
|Structural/ Problematising
|Highlighting critical features
|Drawing attention to the most important aspects of the problem, highlighting ‘discrepancies’ (Reiser, 2004)
|‘Do you remember you mentioned the ethics review, what other purposes might it have?’
|-
|Problematising
|Comparing the current problem with a previously solved one
|Showing similarities between solutions
|‘Do you recall the situation that happened to Dr Smith when he invited participants into his survey? This situation may actually have similar implications.’
|}
Offering feedback and facilitating reflection are critical components when using scaffolding in research ethics and integrity training.
Feedback is more effective:
*when given as soon as possible after the session,
*when it is focused,
*when considered as a process, not a one-time shot,
*when receivers participate in the feedback process freely or when doing so is required by regular professional standards,
*when it has a restricted and chosen number of negative comments mixed in with a decent number of positive and encouraging remarks.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000074-QINU`"'
*when negative information is "sandwiched" between positive information,
*when it allows the receiver to respond and interact,
*when given frequently, but not excessively,
*when it creates cognitive [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/cognitive-dissonance dissonance].'"`UNIQ--ref-00000075-QINU`"'
Feedback can be provided by the trainer as well as by peers. Peer feedback is effective:
*when information is gathered from different people,
*when it is believed that the information's source is reliable, informed, and has a good intention,
*when the status or career level of the feedback provider and its’ recipient are the same.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000076-QINU`"'
Scaffolding techniques are utilised in [[Initiative:Fa186292-623f-4b6f-a21e-44250c057f15|RID-SSISS]], [[Initiative:76ef100a-e459-4942-bd1f-701f747e8906|ROSiE]], [[Initiative:8eed30fd-c2ed-44d1-9752-753092bd350e|VIRT2UE]], [[Initiative:F9656f91-a514-44ff-9264-d6b3414fdddc|INTEGRITY]], [[Initiative:0582c7af-35eb-4def-b74e-c884f29965da|Path2Integrity]], and in the Case studies section of [https://classroom.eneri.eu/ ENERI Classroom].
'"`UNIQ--references-00000077-QINU`"'
[https://www.structural-learning.com/post/scaffolding-in-education-a-teachers-guide Scaffolding] is a teaching technique, which involves providing tailored support to learners based on their current expertise and gradually withdrawing support as they become more proficient. This approach, researched in the context of research ethics and integrity, is used in both face-to-face and online learning environments, including problem-based and inquiry learning.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000A2-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000A3-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000A4-QINU`"' Conceptual scaffolding is crucial in problem-based and inquiry learning, helping learners navigate complex concepts and considering various learning styles. Teachers can adjust academic content to suit learners' abilities. Online courses benefit from personalised learning paths that can be adjusted in real-time. Scaffolding aligns with the idea of Vygotsky's zone of proximal development, that is instruction and facilitation should target the domain where the learner can function with assistance. It is unnecessary to provide scaffolding in domains which the learner already masters, or which are still beyond the learners reach.
When teaching research ethics and integrity, scaffolding entails dissecting difficult ideas into smaller, more digestible chunks and supporting students as they gain knowledge. Scaffolding can be planned into the design of the course teaching/learning activities and the instructions of these, but often opportunities to incorporate scaffolding techniques present themselves ad hoc. In this case, it is important that the trainer is aware of a variety of techniques and recognises situations in which they can be beneficially used to support learning. The steps for incorporating scaffolding include:
#Identifying what the learner already knows, that is, what is their current level and where is the zone of proximal development:#Setting goals, which reflect the learning objectives, for the learner in line with what was determined to be within reach in the prior step:#Planning a suitable breakdown of goals and activities in support of the goals:#Carrying out the training with scaffolding, monitoring of learning and provision of feedback during the learning:#Adjusting the support and gradually decreasing it as the learner progresses towards the goal:#New goals and planning activities as the prior goals are reached.
For example the website [https://www.buffalo.edu/catt.html Scaffolding Over Time] prepared by the Office of Curriculum and Teaching Transformation, University of Buffalo provides more information on Scaffolding for the trainer interested in using this technique.
Table 3 presents a scaffolding framework utilised in research ethics training.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000A5-QINU`"'
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!'''Scaffolding process'''
!'''Scaffolding mechanism'''
!'''Scaffolding technique'''
!'''Scaffolding purpose'''
!'''Illustrative example'''
|-
| rowspan="6"|SENSE-MAKING
|Problematising
|Hinting
|Give an indirect suggestion or piece of evidence that leads toward a problem solution (Merriam-Webster)
|‘So, the documents pertaining to research ethics and integrity to consult would be…’ (implying that some documents should be consulted)
|-
|Problematising
|Describing the problem to direct focus
|Orient to the important features (Tambaum, 2017)
|‘Indeed, when you have to get an informed consent you should consider various aspects, for example …’
|-
|Structural/ Problematising
|Making fill-in-the-blank kinds of requests
|A statement or a question with a missing component (but some info is given)
|‘A good way to highlight the importance of research integrity would be to ….?’
|-
|Structural/ Problematising
|Asking a leading question (P – why?)
|A question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted
|‘Where can you find the information pertaining to the codes of conduct?’
|-
|Structural
|Providing an example
|Giving an example to illustrate a point
|‘For example, in Europe it is a common practice to consult a research integrity advisor.’
|-
|Structural
|Providing physical props
|Helping to understand by mimicking or showing a visual aid
|‘What do you think are the ethical aspects of designing this item?’ (show e.g. a fork)
|-
| rowspan="6"|PROCESS
MANAGEMENT
|Structural
|Pumping
|Simulating to go further without specific instructions (Tambaum, 2017)
|‘OK, what else?’
|-
|Structural
|Redirecting the learner
|Showing which direction to go, which aspect should be tackled next (especially when seeing that the direction is lost/off)
|‘All right, let’s get back to the track and discuss the next steps of the ethics review process’
|-
|Structural
|Decomposing the task
|Making the bigger task into smaller components
|‘First, think what you know about the ethics review process, then, read the paragraph and finally…’ (give instructions one task after another)
|-
|Structural
|Initiating the reasoning step
|Use the faculty of reason so as to arrive at conclusions
|‘First, think what you know about the ethics review process, then, read the paragraph and finally…’ (give instructions one task after another)
|-
|Structural
|Completing the learners’ reasoning
|‘Splicing in’ the correct answer (Tambaum, 2017)
|(the learner cannot end the thought) ‘... you mean a code of conduct should be consulted?’
|-
|Structural
|Executing parts of the skill
|Do parts of the task for the learner to give an example
|‘OK, so first you consult the ALLEA code of conduct and then …’
|-
| rowspan="3"|ARTICULATION
&
REFLECTION
|Structural
|Maintaining goal orientation
|Reminding the learner of some aspect of the task
|‘Have you also had time to think about …?’
|-
|Structural/ Problematising
|Highlighting critical features
|Drawing attention to the most important aspects of the problem;highlighting ‘discrepancies’ (Reiser, 2004)
|‘Do you remember you mentioned the ethics review, what other purposes might it have?’
|-
|Problematising
|Comparing the current problem with a previously solved one
|Showing similarities between solutions
|‘Do you recall the situation that happened to Dr Smith when he invited participants into his survey? This situation may actually have similar implications.’
|}
Offering feedback and facilitating reflection are critical components when using scaffolding in research ethics and integrity training.
Feedback is more effective:
*when given as soon as possible after the session,
*when it is focused,
*when considered as a process, not a one-time shot,
*when receivers participate in the feedback process freely or when doing so is required by regular professional standards,
*when it has a restricted and chosen number of negative comments mixed in with a decent number of positive and encouraging remarks.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000A6-QINU`"'
*when negative information is "sandwiched" between positive information,
*when it allows the receiver to respond and interact,
*when given frequently, but not excessively,
*when it creates cognitive [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/cognitive-dissonance dissonance].'"`UNIQ--ref-000000A7-QINU`"'
Feedback can be provided by the trainer as well as by peers. Peer feedback is effective:
*when information is gathered from different people,
*when it is believed that the information's source is reliable, informed, and has a good intention,
*when the status or career level of the feedback provider and its’ recipient are the same.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000A8-QINU`"'
Scaffolding techniques are utilised in [[Initiative:Fa186292-623f-4b6f-a21e-44250c057f15|RID-SSISS]], [[Initiative:76ef100a-e459-4942-bd1f-701f747e8906|ROSiE]], [[Initiative:8eed30fd-c2ed-44d1-9752-753092bd350e|VIRT2UE]], [[Initiative:F9656f91-a514-44ff-9264-d6b3414fdddc|INTEGRITY]], [[Initiative:0582c7af-35eb-4def-b74e-c884f29965da|Path2Integrity]], and in the Case studies section of [https://classroom.eneri.eu/ ENERI Classroom].
'"`UNIQ--references-000000A9-QINU`"'
Podcasts are not all the same. Different formats shape how information is presented and how listeners experience it.
Choosing a format influences how structured an episode needs to be, how much preparation is required, and how information is delivered to the listener.
Common podcast formats include interviews, solo episodes, conversations, and more produced or edited formats. In an interview, a host speaks with a guest, allowing for different perspectives. Solo formats give one speaker full control over structure and explanation, while conversations involve multiple voices and can feel more informal. More produced formats use editing, narration, or sound design, which can be engaging but require more preparation.
The format you choose affects how easily listeners can follow your content. +
Work in groups or pairs. If this is not possible, reflect individually. Identify an area of research and reflect on the questions below.
*Power and responsibility
o Who makes decisions related to what is an important research question and which studies get funded?
o Who is most affected by the research?
*Knowledge and inclusion
o What types of knowledge are relevant (scientific, local, traditional)?
o Are any perspectives missing or undervalued?
o How do the ways we do research influence whose knowledge is heard?
o Are community members involved in interpretation and decision-making, or only data collection?
*Fairness and benefits
o Who benefits from current practices?
o Who might be excluded or disadvantaged?
o Have expectations related to the benefits of research (e.g. intellectual property, authorship, and data ownership) been discussed? +
Incorporating gender, health, and climate justice in your research: A reflexive question card exercise +
Listen to an episode of the Earth to Research podcast, which explores how research can respond to the ecological crisis and broader societal challenges. In this episode health psychologist Dr. Petra Verdonk explores what planetary health means for all researchers, practitioners, and change-makers.
Speaking with host Lucy Sabin, Verdonk connects intersectionality, gender mainstreaming, and reflexivity to wider movements in policy, action research, and climate campaigning.
The podcast episode explores how climate change, gender, and health are deeply interconnected and must be understood through an intersectional and systems-oriented lens. Petra Verdonk argues that much research and policy is still based on narrow and “skewed” knowledge systems that assume neutrality while in fact reflecting limited and dominant perspectives. She emphasises that simply including more women or marginalised groups is not enough;instead, research frameworks themselves need to be critically rethought. The conversation highlights how climate change intensifies existing inequalities and cannot be addressed through purely technical or individual-focused solutions, such as simply “greening” current systems like transport or healthcare. Instead, it calls for reimagining these systems entirely, considering context, place, and lived experience. The episode also discusses intersectionality as a theory rooted in injustice and inequality rather than just a method for categorising differences, and stresses the importance of reflexivity,
positional awareness, and learning from diverse communities in both research and policy-making. +
'''Valuing sustainability'''
Acknowledge diverse perspectives and values concerning environmental and climate justice in the context of research and innovation. Reflect on how personal values and perspectives regarding the environment influence decisions and actions taken during the research process. Consider professional competency in research and innovation to include a responsibility to reduce environmental harms and increase environmental benefits. Uphold the do no (significant) harm principle and precautionary principle in relation to research and innovation.
'''Supporting fairness'''
Recognize the disproportionate impact of the planetary crisis on and within different communities due to coloniality and systemic injustice.
Consider the implications of global and local justice perspectives on research methodologies, priorities, and outcomes.
Support equity and justice for present and future generations in research and innovation proposals.
Conduct research and innovation activities in a way that contributes to both social and environmental justice
'''Promoting nature'''
Acknowledge that research and innovation are embedded in, and can cause significant harm to, ecological systems. Perceive the needs and rights of non-human Nature as a fundamental aspect of research ethics. Practice care and respect towards the environment and other species when designing a research or innovation project +
Click on the hotspots to explore the environmental impacts associated with wet and dry laboratory research practices and discover how Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can help identify each environmental hotspots and support more sustainable research. +
Doing research with communities affected by climate change: Climate-conscious methodologies matrix (for researchers and ethics reviewers) +
The climate-conscious methodologies matrix helps researchers, students, and citizen scientists make ethical and responsible decisions in research. It is especially useful when working with climate-related impacts (such as floods, heatwaves, or droughts), with vulnerable or affected communities.
The tool encourages you to '''ask good questions''' throughout all stages of your research (from the early design to communication of results) and helps you adapt your methods while keeping fairness, safety, and community needs at the centre.
In a changing climate, traditional research methods may not work or may cause harm. Communities may be under stress. Researchers may face risks. By using the matrix, you can:
*'''Stay flexible,''' but still do high-quality research
*'''Respect local people and ecosystems'''
*'''Build trust''' through careful planning and honest communication
*'''Support climate justice''' by including affected voices in all stages of research.
In the following steps 5 deks of cards are presented. Each of them addresses the following methodological components:
*Research design
*Assessment and measurement strategies
*Data evaluation and interpretation
*Ethical issues and scientific integrity
*Communication of research findings
Have a look at how to use the cards by clicking on the link below. +
This course promotes the use of feminist moderation practices to support the creation of safer spacer for inclusive dialogues. To learn more about this we encourage you to explore topics like safe spaces, polarisation, sensitive issues, and accessibility via course below. +
A fair plan for access to the benefits of pandemic research should be agreed early on in any project, in collaboration with stakeholders. +
Essay Activity +
Flashcards activity. +
In this lecture, François Jost discusses the responsibilities of professional scientists towards citizen scientists. The first segment of the lecture covers the importance of recognising citizen scientists as partners, promoting inclusivity, and providing them with training. The second segment emphasises the need for open communication and transparency, open data management, and acknowledging the contributions and application of the citizen science approach.
'''Watch the lecture and then answer the questions.'''
'''Further reading:'''
Ten Principles of Citizen Science – European Citizen Science Association (ECSA). https://www.ecsa.ngo/10-principles/
Empowering citizens through science: The role of citizen science in Europe. https://data.europa.eu/en/news-events/news/empowering-citizens-through-science-role-citizen-science-europe
Herodotou, C., Scanlon, E., & Sharples, M. (2021). Methods of Promoting Learning and Data Quality in Citizen and Community Science. Frontiers in Climate, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2021.614567
Eleta, I., Clavell, G. G., Righi, V., & Balestrini, M. (2019). The Promise of Participation and Decision-Making Power in Citizen Science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.171 +
4
Provide contact information in case of questions or if doubts arise during the practice time in between the participatory sessions.
Set a deadline and give instructions for the submission of the self-reflection forms. This should be at least one week prior to the follow up participatory session. +
The overall goal of the first session is to introduce the five exercises which represent the face-to-face/participatory part of the blended learning training and to prepare trainees to practice facilitating the exercises themselves. When planning the first session you:
a. Plan enough time per exercise (minimum 2 h).
As a trainer, you will first facilitate the exercises and let the trainees experience them. Then you will describe and explain the knowledge and competencies needed to facilitate the exercise as a trainer. Make time for pauses between the exercises for trainees to relax and reflect. Depending on the time schedule, it may also be necessary to provide food and drinks (or directions to restaurants or stores nearby).
b. Provide time to explain what trainees are expected to do in between the first and the follow up participatory sessions . You might consider providing opportunities to collectively reflect on how to plan their training practice and whether it would be necessary to adapt the exercises based on the characteristics of the group of participants they will train in their own work setting +
Get in touch with your trainer and submit your self-reflection forms. Share questions or issues you might want to address during the second face-to-face session with your trainer. For example: what facilitated your participants’ learning or what impeded it? What might be done differently in any subsequent moment of facilitation and what to keep unchanged? +
Remind participants of the overall goals of the training and ask them to reflect on the specific goals of the exercises and their contribution to the overall goals. +
Now, start a debate between both groups. Ask them to convince the other team to support their movie character (Dr. Jim Curran or Dr. Don Francis).
Stop the discussion after a couple of minutes for some reflection:
1. How did the participants feel about the conversation? What was the atmosphere like?
2. If some participants were assigned to be observers, they rst describe what they saw happening.
3. Make notes on a black- or whiteboard or flip-over about the characteristics of the discussion (e.g. competitive, interruptions, raising voices). +
Varieties of goodness in research - a rotary style exercise (variation to original VIRT2UE exercise)) +
The group is divide in subgroups of 3-5 participants. The groups each pick a different Variety of Goodness that they will start working on. In case there are more Varieties of Goodness than subgroups, the trainer decides together with the participants which Varieties of Goodness will be used. The difficulty of grasping the concept or the similarities between varieties may be taken into account. +
This module suggests a contextualized reading of the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECoC) using five selected recommendations for Good Research Practices mentioned in the document. The exercise is to identify breaches for each of the norms in the learner’s respective field(s) of research. This way, you are not only invited to reflect on the relevance of the ECoC for your research, you may also detect any breaches of research integrity better in the future.
<br />[http://courses.embassy.science/research_integrity_in_your_context/story.html Open the course] +
