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
6
Programı ve takvimi tasarladıktan sonra eğitimi ilan edin ve katılımcıları davet edin. Kimleri davet edeceğinize karar verirken lütfen VIRT2UE eğitiminin hedef kitlesinin öncelikle araştırmacılar veya araştırma konusunda deneyimi olan (yani araştırmacı olarak çalışmış ya da çalışıyor olan) eğitmenler/ eğitimciler/ öğretmenler olduğunu unutmayın. Eğitiminize katılan kişilerin araştırma doğruluğuna ilişkin temel bir anlayışı haiz olması gerekmektedir. Katılımcıları eğitime davet ederken örnek davet mektubunu kullanabilirsiniz. +
Vaka net bir biçimde anlaşıldıktan sonra katılımcılardan kendilerini vakayı sunan kişinin yerine koymalarını ve eğer sunucu yerinde kendileri olsa bu ikilemde hangi erdem(ler)in (iki tane erdem belirlenmesi yeterlidir ancak daha fazlası da mümkündür) rol oynayacağını düşünmelerini isteyin. Bunun için katılımcılara şu soruyu sorabilirsiniz:
“Eğer vakayı sunan kişinin durumunda olsaydınız ve ne yapacağınıza karar vermeniz gerekseydi, sizin için bu kararı verirken hangi erdem önemli olurdu?”
Lütfen belirtilecek erdemlerin ikilemin seçeneklerinden biriyle bağlantılı olması gerekmediğini unutmayın. Bu aşamada katılımcılar söz konusu durumda doğrulukla hareket edebilmek için hangi ahlaki niteliği (erdemi) hayata geçirmeleri gerektiği üzerine fikir yürütmek durumundadır. Bağlamsal olarak, katılımcılardan seçtikleri erdemi takip edecek eylem kuralının (normunun) ya da davranışın ne olduğu üzerine fikir yürütmelerini isteyin. Bunun için kendilerine şu soruları sorabilirler:
“Bu durumda bu erdeme uygun davranabilmek için ne yapmam gerekir?”
“Bu durumda bu erdemi hayata geçirebilmek için nasıl bir eylem kuralını takip etmem gerekir?”
Lütfen aynı erdemle farklı normların ya da aynı normla farklı erdemlerin ilişkilendirilebileceğini unutmayın. +
Sizlerden grup içerisinde yaptığınız tartışmanın kısa bir sunumunu gerçekleştirmeniz istenecektir. Yürüttüğünüz tartışmanın sonuçlarını sunmak üzere grup üyelerinden birini sözcü olarak seçebilirsiniz. +
Kurallardan, kullanılacak materyallerden ve takip edilecek adımlardan bahsederek oyunun nasıl oynanacağını katılımcılara açıklayın ('''Pratik ipuçları''' bölümüne bakınız).
Tercih kartlarını ve tabloları dağıtın. Her bir oyuncuya dört adet tercih kartı verilmelidir (A, B, C ve D). Çıktısını almış olduğunuz olduğunuz, ikileme ilişkin bilgileri içeren belgeleri dağıtın ya da bu bilgileri içeren PPT sunumunu ekrana/ duvara yansıtın. (Bunlara alternatif olarak, katılımcılardan <u>ikilem oyunu uygulamasını</u> indirmelerini de isteyebilirsiniz. Bu durumda uygulamanın kullanım talimatlarını biliyor olmanız gerekir.) Bundan sonraki adım her grubun katılımcılarının kimin ilk önce başlayacağına karar vermesidir.
Katılımcılara diledikleri zaman size teknik sorular sorabileceklerini hatırlatın ve ikilem(ler)i tartışmak için ne kadar süreleri olduğunu bildirin. +
Küçük gruplar içerisinde öz beyan formları üzerine fikir yürütüldükten sonra katılımcıları genel oturuma geri dönmeye davet edin ve kendilerinden sorulara verdikleri yanıtları paylaşmalarını isteyin. Bu paylaşım esnasında her örnek üzerinde durulması gerekmediğinden katılımcılara, daha ziyade, örnek verirken zorlanıp zorlanmadıklarını ve anlaşmazlıklar olup olmadığını sorun. Oturumu kapatırken genel bulguları özetleyin ve Araştırmalarda Dürüstlük Konusunda Avrupa Davranış Kodu’nun (<u>[https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/ ECoC]</u>) iyilik türlerini örnekleyen bölümlerinin üzerinden geçin. +
Katılımcılara sertifikalı VIRT2UE eğitmeni olabilmek için 10 farklı kişiye (tercihen eğitmenlere) bu eğitimi vermeleri gerektiğini hatırlatın. Eğitimin eğitmenlere verilmesinin mümkün olmaması durumunda eğitmen olma potansiyeli olan araştırmacılara verilmesi de mümkündür. +
Nun soll es um den Dialog gehen. Präsentiere die Merkmale eines Dialogs: Tempo herausnehmen, Zuhören statt Sprechen, kein vorschnelles Urteilen, Fragen stellen (siehe „Praktische Tipps“). Du kannst die Übersicht über die Unterschiede zwischen Debatte und Dialog als Handout an die Teilnehmer:innen austeilen. +
Sobald die präsentierte Situation für alle klar vorstellbar ist, bitte die Teilnehmenden nochmals, sich in die Lage der Person zu versetzen, die den Fall präsentiert hat. Lade sie nun ein, darüber nachzudenken welche Werte/Tugenden in dem präsentierten Dilemma für sie eine Rolle spielen würden, wenn sie selbst in der Situation der präsentierenden Person wären. Zwei Werte/Tugenden sind ausreichend, gerne dürfen die Teilnehmenden auch mehr als zwei Werte/Tugenden nennen. Eine mögliche Frage an die Teilnehmenden ist:
„Wenn ihr in der Situation von [Name der Person, die ihren Fall präsentiert hat] wärt und entscheiden müsstet, was zu tun wäre, welcher Wert oder welche Tugend wäre für euch bei dieser Entscheidung wichtig?“
Beachte, dass die Werte oder Tugenden nicht unbedingt mit einer der zuvor ausgearbeiteten Handlungsoptionen A oder B in Verbindung gebracht werden müssen. In diesem Schritt sollen die Teilnehmenden lediglich darüber nachdenken, welche moralische Eigenschaft („Tugend“) sie verkörpern sollten (oder: welche Werte ihr Handeln leiten sollten), um in dieser präsentierten Situation integer zu handeln. Bitte die Teilnehmenden in diesem Zusammenhang, darüber nachzudenken, welche Handlungsvorschrift („Norm“) oder welches konkrete Verhalten sich aus dem von ihnen gewählten Wert oder Tugend ergibt. Mögliche Fragen, die sich die Teilnehmenden stellen können, sind:
„Was sollte ich in dieser Situation tun, um im Einklang mit diesem Wert / dieser Tugend zu handeln?“
„Welche Handlungsvorschrift sollte ich befolgen, um diesen Wert / diese Tugend in dieser Situation zum Ausdruck zu bringen?“
Beachte, dass verschiedene Normen mit dem gleichen Wert / der gleichen Tugend in Verbindung gebracht werden können und umgekehrt. +
Bitte die Teilnehmenden nach der Reflexion ihrer Selbstauskunfts-Arbeitsblätter in Kleingruppen zurück ins Plenum, um dort über ihre Antworten auf die Fragen zu berichten. Im Plenum muss nicht jedes Beispiel berichtet werden. Vielmehr solltest du nachfragen, ob es Schwierigkeiten bei der Nennung von Beispielen gab und ob Unstimmigkeiten aufgetreten sind.
Beende den Workshop, indem du die Erkenntnisse der Gruppe zusammenfasst und die verschiedenen Sektionen des [https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/%20ECoC Europäischen Verhaltenskodex für Integrität in der Forschung] zeigst, in denen die verschiedenen Arten des Guten in der Forschung veranschaulicht sind. +
After reflecting on the self-declaration sheet in small groups, invite participants to go back to the plenary session and ask them to report on their responses to the questions. Note that during the reporting they don’t have to report on each example. Rather, ask them if there were difficulties in providing examples and if there were disagreements.
Conclude the session by summarizing the group findings and by going through sections of the European Code Of Conduct For Research Integrity ([https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/ ECoC]) that exemplify the typologies of goodness. +
[https://www.helsinki.fi/en/researchgroups/diversity-multilingualism-and-social-justice-in-education/projects-1/ended-projects/researcher-identity-development-strengthening-science-in-society-strategies-rid-ssiss 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 (see Table 1 for an overview). +
[https://www.helsinki.fi/en/researchgroups/diversity-multilingualism-and-social-justice-in-education/projects-1/ended-projects/researcher-identity-development-strengthening-science-in-society-strategies-rid-ssiss 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 (see Table 1 for an overview). +
To introduce participants to the topic, you can either invite an expert to give a lecture or present the topic yourself (perhaps you are the expert).
Your lecture should cover the core ethical concepts related to [the topic of this session] and apply them to practical cases. The IRECS modules, including videos and examples, can be used to develop your lecture.
You can find an example of this [[Instruction:D51b8272-661c-49eb-875a-13da8a955df5|here]].
After the lecure dedicate 10 min to Q&A (if you are working with an expert some questions can be prepared in advance to get the discussion going).
'''<u><span lang="EN-US">Trainer Tip</span></u>''' <span lang="EN-US">Use questions to keep the lecture dynamic and engaging. Consider takinga breack at this point.</span> +
<div>
*<span lang="EN-US">Ask each group to present their analysis (5 minutes per group, depending on the number of groups).</span>
*<span lang="EN-US">Facilitate a plenary discussion to connect insights to real-world practices. Ask participants about their own experiences, (e.g. related real life examples they want to share them with the group).</span>
*<span lang="EN-US">To prompt the discussion you can make use of the following questions:</span>
<span lang="EN-US">How did you experience the exercise?</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Did your view change?</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Do you see any similarities in real life experiences?</span>
Were you surprised by any particular point that was raised during the discussions?
</div> +
<div>
To continue reflection on ethical issues related to biobanking in more dept, encourage trainees to explore and discuss a few statements. This exercise will provide trainees insight in the complexity of the ethical challenges and the values which are at stake.
You can create an imaginary line in the room, numbered from one to ten, where ‘''one''’ represents complete disagreement and ‘''ten''’ signifies full agreement. As a trainer, you will read statements aloud and ask trainees to stand on the line based on how much they agree with each statement.
You can use the following statements:
</div><div>
*Researchers should inform participants about genetic findings that could affect their health.
*Participants should be re-contacted for consent if their samples are used for new research.
*The collection of digital DNA material through biobanking should be halted, as complete data security cannot be fully guaranteed.
Read the first statement aloud and invite trainees to take a position on the line. Once everyone has selected a position on the line you can encourage dialogue between trainees using the following questions: ''Could you explain why are you standing there?'' ''Could you ask an open question to someone who is standing at the opposite end of the line? What would you like to know from someone else’s perspective? What value is at stake for you? Is there anything that would move you to another side of the line?''
</div> +
[[File:A drop of water.png|center|frameless|600x600px]]
Researchers in many fields have long known that the act of looking at something can change it. This holds true for people, for animals, and for particles. Below you will see four well known examples of how an observer can have an impact on what they are observing. For this drag and drop exercise, match the impact type to the meaning.
'''Exercise Feedback'''
These phenomena are well known in research. For instance, being observed makes psychiatric patients a third less likely to require sedation (Damsa et al, 2006), or the famous double slit experiment in modern physics. But many people believe that what we see is never what ‘really is’, even in the most highly controlled experimental settings. What do you think? +
The fourth type of resource you can add are scenarios. These are short, '''fictional''' situations that present a challenge or dilemma related to research integrity or ethics. Scenarios are designed to spark reflection, discussion, and learning, and are often used in training or education settings.
Unlike cases, '''scenarios should not be real''', but they should feel realistic and help people think through how to handle ethical issues in research practice.
To add a scenario, you need at least:
*A Title
*Some text in the "What is this about?" box
*Some selections in the "For whom is this important?" box
*A URL to the guideline in the "Link" box
For inspiration, check out our existing [https://embassy.science/wiki/Special:BrowseData/Resource?_search_Resource_Type%5B0%5D=Scenarios scenarios]. +
[[File:M6..png|center|frameless|600x600px]]
<div><div>
Dr Langa’s advice helps Professor Smith and Dr Jones realise that at the very least they need to address issues around Helicopter research, Benefit Sharing, Knowledge transfer, Informed consent, Data Ownership and Local ethical oversight. Flip the cards to find out ways they might address these issues.
</div></div><div></div> +
[[File:M6.png|center|frameless|600x600px]]
Addressing marginalization in research requires a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion throughout the research process. This includes actively involving marginalized communities in research design and decision-making, adopting culturally responsive methodologies, acknowledging and addressing power imbalances, and prioritizing the voices and perspectives of those who have been historically marginalized.
However, the equitable inclusion of all is not always easy and can raise specific ethical concerns. Including historically marginalized populations in research requires sensitivity and may, on some occasions, require adaption of research processes, methodologies and assumptions. +
[[File:Mm5.png|center|frameless|600x600px]]
Exploitation of one or more partners can be a problem in international collaborative research because the benefits of research are not always distributed evenly. Researchers must take care to ensure that everyone involved is treated fairly. +
