Search by property

This page provides a simple browsing interface for finding entities described by a property and a named value. Other available search interfaces include the page property search, and the ask query builder.

List of results

Virtues and Norms + (Ask participants to fill in a table with t … Ask participants to fill in a table with the same elements (see below), for example: {| class="wikitable" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"| width="171" valign="top"|'''Virtue'''| width="345" valign="top"|'''Norm/action'''|-| width="171" valign="top"|Justice| width="345" valign="top"|I should credit all contributors|-| width="171" valign="top"|Courage| width="345" valign="top"|I should speak up|}A hand-out with '''a list''' of research integrity related virtues, '''a table''' of examples and '''an empty table''' can be distributed (see practical tips). Together with the empty table, you should distribute some post-it notes. In the meantime, draw the same table on a flip-chart (or white board) with three columns: perspective, virtue, norm (see below). You can also consider doing this in advance, before the session. {| class="wikitable" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"| width="154" valign="top"|'''Name'''| width="137" valign="top"|'''Virtue'''| width="226" valign="top"|'''Norm/action'''|-| rowspan="2" width="154" valign="top"|Louise| width="137" valign="top"|Justice| width="226" valign="top"|I should credit all the contributors|-| width="137" valign="top"|Courage| width="226" valign="top"|I should speak up|-| width="154" valign="top"|Ben| width="137" valign="top"|…| width="226" valign="top"|…..|}Ask all the participants to write their virtues and norms on a post-it (in clear writing) and then invite them to stand up and go to the table on the flip-chart to write down their name and place their post-its with their virtue(s) and norms next to their name. In this way an overview of perspectives, virtues and norms is created.erspectives, virtues and norms is created.)
Debate and Dialogue + (Ask participants to reflect on the value o … Ask participants to reflect on the value of dialogue and how to use it for fostering group reflection. Focus on the overall lessons learned related to the objectives of the exercise. You might ask questions like:***Taking in account the objectives, what did you learn from this exercise? More specifically: i) Did you become more aware of the strengths of dialogue and debate? ii) Do you think the exercise was useful to learn how to use and to encourage dialogue as a tool for reflection processes? iii) Did you learn anything else?*How will the lessons learned influence your future actions?*What do you need to foster a dialogue?The order of the exercise might give the participants the impression that debate is ‘wrong’ and dialogue is ‘right’. Try to emphasize in this last step that dialogue is useful and helpful in reflection processes but that a debate can be good and useful in other situations with other purposes.l in other situations with other purposes.)
Modified Dilemma Game + (Ask participants to shortly evaluate the s … Ask participants to shortly evaluate the session and your facilitation. In this step you may ask participants questions such as:- Were the instructions clear enough? - Do you think that the case was appropriate? - Would you have any suggestions to do the session differently?- What do you think the strong aspects of this session are?- Are there any points to improve?n are? - Are there any points to improve?)
The Middle Position + (Ask rapporteurs to very briefly: *summarize the virtues discussed in the subgroup discussions, including differences and similarities;*summarize differences and similarities in how people formulated the middle position (not the differences and similarities themselves but in general);''Tip: focus especially on virtues, and middle positions (not on the specific cases themselves)''To start a plenary conversation after the brief summaries of the rapporteurs ask participants the following questions:- Was it easy or difficult to find a personal case, and to select a virtue for it? - Did you learn to look at inherent moral ambiguity of specific virtues in a broader or in a different way when these were identified by others? - Would the case owner want to describe how he/she experienced the exercise? owner want to describe how he/she experienced the exercise?)
‘And the band played on’ movie fragment no. 3 + (Ask the group how the conversation could be improved. List their suggestions on the black- or whiteboard or flip-over sheet in a new column.)
Modified Dilemma Game + (Ask the group to reflect on the process, a … Ask the group to reflect on the process, and to evaluate if the learning objectives were met. Foster a brief dialogue on what might have been learned as a group.In this step the facilitator may ask participants questions such as:- Was it easy or difficult to identify the relevant principles and virtues in the chosen dilemma? - Did this exercise help you with identifying and connecting to formally defined principles (e.g. from the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity)?- Did most of the players agree or disagree with the final choice?- What were the main points of contention?- Why did people disagree (e.g. differences in experience, training, background, values, norms…)?- What were the other options?- Was any alternative option proposed?- Did anybody change her/his mind as a result of the discussion?- Why would you NOT follow the morally ideal course of action? - What is needed to act morally in your work setting? What were the most convincing arguments used in the discussion?- On which areas do you feel there is insufficient consensus?- How can you best address future dilemmas in your daily work?- How can shared values and principles be fostered? shared values and principles be fostered?)
‘And the band played on’ movie fragment no. 3 + (Ask the group who they vouch for: Dr. Jim … Ask the group who they vouch for: Dr. Jim Curran or Dr. Don Francis. Show their picture with their names so that all participants remember who is who. Based on their choice, the group is divided in two groups.1. If one group turns out to be really small, you can ask if a couple of participants feel condent to switch teams.2. In case there are some participants who don’t feel condent to choose either one, you could decide to include them in the exercise as observers.include them in the exercise as observers.)
Varieties of goodness in research - a rotary style exercise (variation to original VIRT2UE exercise)) + (Ask the participants to ll out the preparation sheet and to submit it prior to the training. Read the submitted material and select some examples to use during the (plenary phase of the) exercise.)
VIRT2UE Certification + (Ask trainees to send you their learning po … Ask trainees to send you their learning portfolios, including: 1) evidence that they have trained 10 researchers (screenshot of video conference tool/attendance sheet/attendance declaration); 2) an overview of tasks completed; 3) reflection forms detailing their experiences facilitating the 5 participatory exercises. You may distribute [https://community.embassy.science/uploads/short-url/kDU9xWHeyxdC4ER1toih5KJGE8H.docx this table] which can be used to create an overview of tasks completed. The certificate confirms that they are didactically skilled research integrity experts.ically skilled research integrity experts.)
Modified Dilemma Game + (At the beginning of the session you will be informed about the background, the aim and the description of the game. You will also be asked to keep information and concerns discussed in relation to the dilemmas confidential.)
Practicing Reflection in Dialogue + (At the end of the session take some time t … At the end of the session take some time to explain what trainees are required to do in the [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:A0d97625-d155-4f6f-abd0-2f84413888ad time in between the two face-to-face sessions]. At this point you: 1. Encourage your trainees to reflect on their respective training participants’ needs. It may be necessary for them to adapt their training to the level of expertise of their training participants, the local context, or the discipline(s). 2. Distribute the [https://www.dropbox.com/s/1fmppqv189jxlqj/Self%20reflection%20form.pdf?dl=0 self-reflection form] and explain to the trainees that this document is meant as a learning tool designed to help them reflect on their experience in facilitating the exercises. By answering the questions, your trainees may reflect on what went well in their facilitation and what they need to improve, learn or what needs further clarification. 3. Consider advising trainees to connect with a colleague, who is also participating in the training (if possible). This can support the learning experience and allow trainers in training to give feedback to each other and (if applicable) share the tasks required to organize the exercises. tasks required to organize the exercises.)
Virtues and Norms + (At this stage it is important to stress co … At this stage it is important to stress confidentiality. During the session a real-life dilemma will be explored, therefore participants are required to keep the information shared during the session strictly confidential. You are strongly recommended to distribute and sign a confidentiality statement in order to formalize the fact that the information you receive, and the cases that will be shared during the exercise, should be kept confidential by all participants and will be destroyed after the training. and will be destroyed after the training.)
Biobanking: Ethics Issues + (BBMRI-ERIC Common Service ELSI https://www … BBMRI-ERIC Common Service ELSI https://www.bbmri-eric.eu/services/common-service-elsi/CIOMS (2016) International ethical guidelines for health-related research involving humans https://cioms.ch/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/WEB-CIOMS-EthicalGuidelines.pdfCouncil of Europe – Biobanks https://www.coe.int/en/web/bioethics/biobanks/-/asset_publisher/lcb5Z6eMEwYb/content/research-on-biological-materials-of-human-origin-new-recommendations-to-member-stat-1Council of Europe (2016) Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on research on biological materials of human origin https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=090000168064e8ff European Commission (2018) Data protection in the EU https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/data-protection-eu_enISBER (International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories) (2024) Best practices for repositories https://www.isber.org/page/BPRNHS Health Research Authority (2021) Research tissue banks and research databasesLast updated on 12 Oct 2021https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/policies-standards-legislation/research-tissue-banks-and-research-databases/ NIH (2024) Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Policy https://sharing.nih.gov/genomic-data-sharing-policy OECD Guidelines for Human Biobanks and Genetic Research Databases (HBGRDs)https://www.bbmri-eric.eu/library/oecd-guidelines-for-human-biobanks-and-genetic-research-databases-hbgrds-2009/?World Medical Association (2016) Declaration of Tapei on ethical considerations regarding health databases and biobankshttps://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-taipei-on-ethical-considerations-regarding-health-databases-and-biobanks/s-regarding-health-databases-and-biobanks/)
Interim Practice Work + (Based on the content of the forms you can … Based on the content of the forms you can prepare a list of topics to be discussed during the second face-to-face session. Questions 3, 4, and 5 of the [https://www.dropbox.com/s/1fmppqv189jxlqj/Self%20reflection%20form.pdf?dl=0 self-reflection form] are particularly helpful to look at for this purpose, as they provide information on what worked well, what did not go well, and what requires attention.You can consider preparing a short PowerPoint listing the input you have collected. This may provide guidance and structure for the discussion.guidance and structure for the discussion.)
Circularity in Research and Innovation + (Based on the video you just watched, answer the following multiple-choice questions by selecting the option that best reflects the key ideas presented.)
Circularity in Research and Innovation + (Based on the video you just watched, answer the following True or False questions.)
Reimagining sustainable field research: Doing science without doing harm + (Based on what you learned from the video, please answer the following questions.)
Reimagining sustainable field research: Doing science without doing harm + (Based on what you learned from the video, … 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.ing, soil sampling, and wildlife sampling.)
Reflecting on Experiences and Practicing Exercises + (Based on your experience and expertise in … Based on your experience and expertise in facilitating and using the face-to-face exercises, you discuss with trainees the competence level and learning needs of the target group they will work with, what are things that the target group would like to discuss more in-depth, and how to implement those issues in the exercise(s).Take some time to show trainees where they can find the training materials on The Embassy of Good Science. You may also instruct them how they can interact with the community by using the discussion section of the platform, and how they can suggest changes to the training materials.suggest changes to the training materials.)
Incorporating gender, health, and climate justice in your research: A reflexive question card exercise + (Based on your previous reflections please revise or formulate a research question that integrates intersectional awareness.)
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.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Beende den Dialog nach etwa 10 min und ref … Beende den Dialog nach etwa 10 min und reflektiere mit der Gruppe über die Unterschiede zwischen einer Debatte und einem Dialog, indem du bspw. folgendes ansprichst / erfragst:* Wahrnehmungen und Gefühle während der Debatte und während des Dialogs* Wie sehr die Teilnehmer:innen sich gegenseitig verstanden haben* Die Gruppendynamik (Welche Personen haben gesprochen? Hatte jede:r Gelegenheit, sich am Gespräch zu beteiligen?, usw.)* Das Verständnis der Inhalte des Fallbeispiels (Motive und Interessen)* Andere Erkenntnisse aus einer Debatte oder einem Dialog (z.B. neue Einblicke gewinnen)Reflektiere mit der Gruppe die Unterschiede zwischen einer Debatte und einem Dialog. Hilfreiche Fragen findest du auch unter „Praktische Tipps“. Halte die Erkenntnisse der Reflektion auf einer Flip-Chart fest. der Reflektion auf einer Flip-Chart fest.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Beende die Debatte nach etwa 10 min (abhän … Beende die Debatte nach etwa 10 min (abhängig von der Gruppengröße) und lass die Gruppe reflektieren, was gerade geschehen ist und auf welche Art sie miteinander debattiert/interagiert haben. Unterstütze sie dabei, vor allem über den Prozess und weniger über den Inhalt der Debatte zu reflektieren. Bitte die Teilnehmer:innen, verschiedene Merkmale einer Debatte zu nennen und notiere sie auf einem Flip-Chart. Mögliche unterstützende Fragen sind bspw.:* Was war an der Art und Weise, wie ihr miteinander gesprochen habt, besonders? Was habt ihr beobachtet oder gefühlt?* Was ist euch an den anderen Personen aufgefallen – an deren Haltung oder Tonfall?* Habt ihr das Gefühl, ihr habt euch gegenseitig verstanden?* Welche Gruppe dominierte die Debatte und wie kam es dazu? (Es kann bspw. passieren, dass eine Gruppe die andere eher offensiv ständig mit neuen Argumenten konfrontiert hat, während die andere Gruppe eher defensiv damit beschäftigt war, die eigene Position zu verteidigen – statt selbst mit Argumenten „anzugreifen“.) Versuche, dich in die Lage der anderen Teilnehmer:innen zu versetzen, und was sie zum Prozess beigetragen haben.* Während du die genannten Merkmale für eine Debatte aufschreibst und diskutierst, frag nach Beispielen. Z.B.: „Was genau hast du gesehen? Was genau ist dir aufgefallen? Was hat dir in dem Moment gefehlt?“Erkläre, dass eine Debatte/Diskussion in bestimmten Situationen wertvoll sein kann – zum Beispiel dann, wenn man schnell Klarheit über die initialen Aussagen, Meinungen oder Positionen in einem moralischen Dilemma gewinnen möchte.einem moralischen Dilemma gewinnen möchte.)
Practicing Reflection in Dialogue + (Before moderating the first face-to-face s … Before moderating the first face-to-face session consider the following points: 1) Prepare necessary power point presentations such as: a. Introduction to the training and the different phases of it b. Introduction to the varieties of goodness as part of the [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea Self Declaration Approach]. c. Introduction to the [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c middle position] exercise. 2) Prepare the meeting rooms (if face to face): a. Bring post-its, markers, pens, flipcharts and paper (read the trainers instruction of the exercises for further information) b. Arrange the chairs into a circle (i.e. avoid lecture setting). This fosters a dynamic learning environment and encourages people to engage in a dialogue with each other.e to engage in a dialogue with each other.)
Virtues and Norms + (Before moving forward provide participants … Before moving forward provide participants with a short definition of virtues and norms (please see [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:B4f7b2e3-af61-4466-94dc-2504affab5a8 Values and norms] and [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:520b3bc7-a6ab-4617-95f2-89c9dee31c53 Virtues in research integrity]) If people have question or doubts you can address them at this stage. ubts you can address them at this stage. )

The Good Researcher: Responsibility, Discourse, and Environmentally Aware Research + (Before we start, take a moment to reflect.)

Werte/Tugenden und Normen + (Beginne die Übung mit einer Begrüßung der … Beginne die Übung mit einer Begrüßung der Teilnehmenden. Gib ihnen eine kurze Einführung in die Übung und erkläre das Ziel der Übung. Denke daran, dass es bei dieser Übung nicht um persönliche Meinungen oder Urteile darüber geht, was jeder einzelne Teilnehmende in der Situation tun würde, oder darum, zu rechtfertigen oder zu verurteilen, was die Person, die ihr Fallbeispiel vorstellt, getan (oder nicht getan) hat. Die Teilnehmenden sollten motiviert sein, sich auf einen Dialog einzulassen und voneinander zu lernen. Das kannst du gern am Anfang der Übung betonen. Als Moderator solltest du außerdem beachten, dass die Präsentation eines persönlichen Fallbeispiels eine herausfordernde und emotional belastende Situation sein kann. Während der Übung übernimmst du die Verantwortung für das Wohlergehen der Person, die ihr Fallbeispiel vorstellt. Du kannst zum Beispiel eine Pause einfordern, wenn du merkst, dass das Gespräch zu schwer oder unangenehm wird.s Gespräch zu schwer oder unangenehm wird.)
Measurement tools for collecting learning outcomes: long-term effect + (Bell, A., Kelton, J., McDonagh, N., Mladen … Bell, A., Kelton, J., McDonagh, N., Mladenovic, R., & Morrison, K. (2011). A critical evaluation of the usefulness of a coding scheme to categorise levels of reflective thinking. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(7), 797-815.Biggs, J. and Collis. K. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press.Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University (3rd ed.) Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Chejara, P., Prieto, L. P., Ruiz-Calleja, A., Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., Shankar, S. K. & Kasepalu, R. (2021). EFAR-MMLA: An Evaluation Framework to Assess and Report Generalizability of Machine Learning Models in MMLA. Sensors, 21(8), 2863.Conqvist, M. (2024). Research ethics in Swedish dissertations in educational sciences – a matter of confusion. Nordic Conference of PhD Supervision, 2024. Karlstad, Sweden.DeLozier, S. J., & Rhodes, M. G. (2017). Flipped classrooms: A review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educational psychology review, 29(1), 141-151.Gibbs, P., Costley. C., Armsby, P. and Trakakis, A. (2007). Developing the ethics of worker-researchers through phronesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510701278716 Hannula. M. S., Haataja, E., Löfström, E., Garcia Moreno-Esteva, E., Salminen-Saari, J., & Laine, A. (2022). Advancing video research methodology to capture the processes of social interaction and multimodality. ZDM Mathematics Education 54, 433–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01323-5Jordan, J. (2007). Taking the first step towards a moral action: A review of moral sensitivity across domains. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 168, 323–359.Kember, David. 1999. Determining the level of reflective thinking from students' written journals using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1), 18–30. '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000003-QINU`"'.Kember, D., Jones, A., Loke, A., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., Tse, H., Webb, C., Wong, F., Wong, M., and Yeung, E. (1999). Determining the level of reflective thinking from students’ written journals using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1), 18–30.Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P., Jones, A., Loke, A. Y., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., Tse, H., Webb, C., Wong, F. K. Y., Wong, M., and Yeung, E. (2000). Development of a questionnaire to measure the level of reflective thinking. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 381–395. '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000004-QINU`"'.Kember, D., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., & Wong, F. K. Y. (2008). A four-category scheme for coding and assessing the level of reflection. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(4), 369-379.Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for evaluation training programs. Journal of American Society of Training Directions, 13, 21–26.Kitchener, K. S. (1985). Ethical principles and ethical decisions in student affairs. In Applied ethics in student services: new directions for student services, number. 30 (pp. 17–29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Löfström, E., (2012) Students’ Ethical Awareness and Conceptions of Research Ethics. Ethics & Behavior,22(5), 349-361. DOI: 10.1080/10508422.2012.679136Löfström, E. and Tammeleht, A. (2023). A pedagogy for teaching research ethics and integrity in the social sciences: case-based and collaborative learning. In Academic Integrity in the Social Sciences (pp.127−145).Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions in adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Mustajoki, H. and Mustajoki, A. (2017). A new approach to research ethics: Using guided dialogue to strengthen research communities. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315545318 .Parder, M.-L., Tammeleht, A., Rajando, K. and Simm, K. (2024). Using vignettes for assessing ethical sensitivity in the national research ethics and integrity study. Poster presentation at the World Conference of Research Integrity, 2024. Athens, Greece.Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in Higher Education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22, 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7Salminen, A., & Pitkänen, L. (2020). Finnish research integrity barometer 2018. Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK publications, 2-2020.Steele, L. M., Mulhearn, T. J., Medeiros, K. E., Watts, L. L., Connelly, S., and Mumford, M. D. (2016). How do we know what works? A review and critique of current practices in ethics training evaluation. Accountability in Research, 23(6), 319–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1186547 .Stoesz, B. M. and Yudintseva, A. (2018). Effectiveness of tutorials for promoting educational integrity: a synthesis paper. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(6). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-018-0030-0 .Stolper, M. & Inguaggiato, G. (n.d.) Debate and Dialogue. [[Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa|https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa]] Tammeleht, A., Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., Koort, K., & Löfström, E. (2019). Collaborative case-based learning process in research ethics. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 15(1), 6.Tammeleht, A., Rodríguez-Triana, M.J., Koort, K., Löfström, E. (2020). Scaffolding collaborative case-based learning in research ethics. Journal of Academic Ethics 19, pages 229–252. Tammeleht, A., Löfström, E. & Rodríguez-Triana, M. J. (2022). Facilitating development of research ethics leadership competencies. International Journal of Educational Integrity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-022-00102-3 Tammeleht, A. (2022). Facilitating the development of research ethics and integrity competencies through scaffolding and collaborative case-based problem-solving. Helsinki: Unigrafia OY, Helsinki Studies in Education.Tammeleht, A., J. Antoniou, R. de La C. Bernabe, C. Chapin, S. van den Hooff, V. N. Mbanya, M.-L. Parder, A. Sairio, K. Videnoja, and E. Löfström. (submitted). Manifestations of research ethics and integrity leadership in national surveys - Cases of Estonia, Finland, Norway, France and the Netherlands.Tammeleht, A., Parder, M.-L., Rajando, K., and Simm, K. (forthcoming). Using vignettes for assessing ethical sensitivity in the national research ethics and integrity survey – an example from Estonia.Thorpe, K. (2004). Reflective learning journals: From concept to practice. Reflective Practice, 5(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/1462394042000270655 .Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education next, 12(1), 82-83.080/1462394042000270655 . Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education next, 12(1), 82-83.)
Using Different Learning Taxonomies + (Besides using Bloom’s Taxonomy to define l … Besides using Bloom’s Taxonomy to define learning objectives, the [https://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/ SOLO Taxonomy] can be used .'"`UNIQ--ref-00000096-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000097-QINU`"' The Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, or SOLO, is a way to set the learning outcomes according to how complicated they are.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000098-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000099-QINU`"' This allows us to evaluate students' work based on its quality following the idea of increasing understanding of complexities: Initially, we learn one or a few aspects of the task (unistructural), then multiple aspects that are unrelated to each other (multistructural), then we learn how to integrate them into a whole (relational), and lastly, we can generalise that whole to still-untaught applications (extended abstract). It evaluates the quality of students' work and understanding:· '''pre-structural''': identify basic ethical concepts without fully understanding them.· '''unistructural''': recognize and label simple ethical procedures.· '''multistructural''': enumerate and describe ethical principles but struggle to connect them.· '''relational''': analyze and apply ethical concepts, understanding interrelations.· '''extended abstract''': generalize and theorize ethical principles to solve novel dilemmas.[[File:SOLOtaxonomy.png|alt=|center|frame|Fig 32. SOLO taxonomy (taken from Tammeleht & Löfström, 2023)]]The SOLO taxonomy has been used to evaluate effectiveness of trainings as well as the development of ethical sensitivity and has been proven to be effective in the context of research ethics and integrity training.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000009A-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-0000009B-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-0000009C-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-0000009D-QINU`"' The verbs emphasised in the descriptions below can be used as indicators of the appropriate levels in learning objectives.''Pre-structural level (0)''At the pre-structural level the learner fails to identify or approach topics in a meaningful way, but simply repeats the words in the question without understanding them.''Unistructural level (1)''At the unistructural level, the learner has sufficient knowledge to identify, recognise, count, find, label, match, name, and perform follow simple procedures. The learner identifies one relevant aspect displaying some familiarity with relevant concepts, but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it. In the context of research ethics and integrity, this may mean identifying certain, perhaps common concepts, but having a limited view of them. For example, the learner may be able to identify some of the things that ought to be mentioned in an information letter to research participants but fails to understand all aspects of ensuring voluntary participation in research.''Multi-structural level (2)''At the multistructural level, the learner can enumerate, describe, illustrate, list, sequence, select, combine, and follow procedures, but struggles to make connections between concepts or draw conclusions based on interrelations. For example, the learner may understand that informed consent is necessary in research but fails to understand that this is so because of the need to respect people’s autonomy and right to make decisions that concern themselves.''Relational level (3)''At the relational level, the learner displays an ability to address the most relevant aspects of the concept and provide explanations pointing out interrelations and providing examples demonstrating their own reasoning. Corresponding action verbs include; analyse, apply, argue, compare, contrast, critique, explain causes, relate and justify. For example, the learner understands at least the main mechanisms and connections between FFP and the detrimental effects to science.''Extended abstract level (4)''At the extended abstract level, the coherent whole is generalised or re-conceptualised at a higher level of abstraction. The learner grasps a more abstract version of the concept, and recognises other domains to which the concept might be applied by displaying the ability to theorise, generate, generalise, hypothesise, create or reflect, formulate and reflect. For example, the learner is able to use knowledge about ethical analysis and ethical principles to solve a novel integrity-related dilemma, which the learner recognises is affecting a research group, but to which the learner has not been exposed before. '"`UNIQ--references-0000009E-QINU`"'p, but to which the learner has not been exposed before. '"`UNIQ--references-0000009E-QINU`"')
Using Different Learning Taxonomies + (Besides using Bloom’s Taxonomy to define l … Besides using Bloom’s Taxonomy to define learning objectives, the [https://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/ SOLO Taxonomy] can be used .'"`UNIQ--ref-000000B9-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000BA-QINU`"' The Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, or SOLO, is a way to set the learning outcomes according to how complicated they are.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000BB-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000BC-QINU`"' In this way, the students' work can be assessed according to its quality and not according to how many parts they have understood correctly: initially, we learn one or a few aspects of the task (unistructural), then multiple aspects that are unrelated to each other (multistructural), then we learn how to integrate them into a whole (relational), and lastly, we can generalise that whole to still-untaught applications (extended abstract).[[File:SOLOtaxonomy.png|alt=|center|frame|Fig 32. SOLO taxonomy (taken from Tammeleht & Löfström, 2023)]]The SOLO taxonomy has been used to evaluate effectiveness of trainings as well as the development of ethical sensitivity and has been proven to be effective in the context of research ethics and integrity training.'"`UNIQ--ref-000000BD-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000BE-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000BF-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000C0-QINU`"' The verbs emphasised in the descriptions below can be used as indicators of the appropriate levels in learning objectives.''Pre-structural level (0)''At the pre-structural level the learner fails to identify or approach topics in a meaningful way, but simply repeats the words in the question without understanding them.''Unistructural level (1)''At the unistructural level, the learner has sufficient knowledge to identify, recognise, count, find, label, match, name, and perform follow simple procedures. The learner identifies one relevant aspect displaying some familiarity with relevant concepts, but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it. In the context of research ethics and integrity, this may mean identifying certain, perhaps common concepts, but having a limited view of them. For example, the learner may be able to identify some of the things that ought to be mentioned in an information letter to research participants but fails to understand all aspects of ensuring voluntary participation in research.''Multi-structural level (2)''At the multistructural level, the learner can enumerate, describe, illustrate, list, sequence, select, combine, and follow procedures, but struggles to make connections between concepts or draw conclusions based on interrelations. For example, the learner may understand that informed consent is necessary in research but fails to understand that this is so because of the need to respect people’s autonomy and right to make decisions that concern themselves.''Relational level (3)''At the relational level, the learner displays an ability to address the most relevant aspects of the concept and provide explanations pointing out interrelations and providing examples demonstrating their own reasoning. Corresponding action verbs include; analyse, apply, argue, compare, contrast, critique, explain causes, relate and justify. For example, the learner understands at least the main mechanisms and connections between FFP and the detrimental effects to science.''Extended abstract level (4)''At the extended abstract level, the coherent whole is generalised or re-conceptualised at a higher level of abstraction. The learner grasps a more abstract version of the concept, and recognises other domains to which the concept might be applied by displaying the ability to theorise, generate, generalise, hypothesise, create or reflect, formulate and reflect. For example, the learner is able to use knowledge about ethical analysis and ethical principles to solve a novel integrity-related dilemma, which the learner recognises is affecting a research group, but to which the learner has not been exposed before. '"`UNIQ--references-000000C1-QINU`"' before. '"`UNIQ--references-000000C1-QINU`"')
Der Balanceakt + (Bevor die Übung in der Gruppe durchgeführt … Bevor die Übung in der Gruppe durchgeführt wird, solltest du die einzelnen Teilnehmer:innen kontaktieren und sie darum bitten, sich auf die Übung vorzubereiten, indem sie sich eine Situation aus ihrem Forschungsalltag überlegen, in der sie moralische Zweifel darüber hatten, was passierte oder was sie hätten tun sollen / tun können (d.h., Situationen, in denen offensichtlich ist, dass etwas moralisch verwerflich in Bezug auf Research Integrity ist, sind für die Übung weniger gut geeignet). Es ist wichtig, dass die Teilnehmenden angeregt werden, über ihre eigenen Erfahrungen nachzudenken. Sie müssen dieses Fallbeispiel aber nicht als Vorbereitung aufschreiben. Es muss außerdem keine dramatische Situation sein, auch gewöhnliche Situationen, in denen dir fragwürdige Forschungspraktiken aufgefallen sind, sind für diese Übung geeignet.allen sind, sind für diese Übung geeignet.)
Der Balanceakt + (Bevor die Übung in der Gruppe durchgeführt … Bevor die Übung in der Gruppe durchgeführt wird, wirst du und die anderen Teilnehmenden gebeten, eine Vertraulichkeitsvereinbarung zu unterschreiben. Dies ist ein schriftliches Festhalten der Erwartungshaltung, dass die während der Übung ausgetauschten Informationen von dir und den anderen Teilnehmenden vertraulich behandelt werden.eilnehmenden vertraulich behandelt werden.)
Werte/Tugenden und Normen + (Bevor die Übung in der Gruppe durchgeführt … Bevor die Übung in der Gruppe durchgeführt wird, werden du und die anderen Teilnehmenden gebeten, eine Vertraulichkeitsvereinbarung zu unterschreiben. Dies ist ein schriftliches Festhalten der Erwartungshaltung, dass die während der Übung ausgetauschten Informationen von dir und den anderen Teilnehmenden vertraulich behandelt werden und nach der Durchführung der Übung vernichtet werden. Durchführung der Übung vernichtet werden.)
Werte/Tugenden und Normen + (Bevor ihr in der Übung fortschreitet, erlä … Bevor ihr in der Übung fortschreitet, erläutere den Teilnehmenden die Konzepte der Werte / Tugenden und der Normen anhand einer kurzen Definition (siehe „Werte und Tugenden“ und „Tugenden in der Research Integrity“). Falls die Teilnehmenden Fragen haben oder Zweifel besteht, ob inhaltlich alles verstanden wurde, dann ist jetzt der Zeitpunkt, um darüber zu sprechen.tzt der Zeitpunkt, um darüber zu sprechen.)
Erdemler ve Normlar + (Bir sonraki adıma geçmeden önce katılımcıl … Bir sonraki adıma geçmeden önce katılımcılara erdem ve norm kavramlarının tanımlarını verin ([https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:B4f7b2e3-af61-4466-94dc-2504affab5a8 Değerler ve normlar] ve [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:520b3bc7-a6ab-4617-95f2-89c9dee31c53 Araştırma doğruluğu ile ilgili erdemler] sayfalarına bakınız). Katılımcıların kafasında soru işareti ya da şüphe doğuran herhangi bir nokta varsa bu aşamada bunları ele alabilirsiniz.ran herhangi bir nokta varsa bu aşamada bunları ele alabilirsiniz.)
Der Selbstauskunfts-Ansatz: Eine Reflexion über das Konzept des Guten in der Wissenschaft + (Bitte die Teilnehmenden nach der Reflexion … 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.ten in der Forschung veranschaulicht sind.)
Werte/Tugenden und Normen + (Bitte die Teilnehmenden, jede:r für sich s … Bitte die Teilnehmenden, jede:r für sich selbst eine Tabelle auszufüllen, die aussehen kann wie diese hier:{| class="wikitable" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"| width="123" valign="top" |'''Wert / Tugend'''| width="472" valign="top" |'''Norm / Handlung'''|-| width="123" valign="top" |Ehrlichkeit| width="472" valign="top" |Ich sollte alle Beteiligten in meinem Manuskript nennen. |-| width="123" valign="top" |Mut| width="472" valign="top" |Ich sollte mit meinem/meiner Betreuer:in sprechen.|}Zur Unterstützung kannst du für diese Übung folgende Dokumente austeilen, die im Handout 2 enthalten sind (siehe „Praktische Tipps“):- Liste von Werten / Tugenden, die relevant für Research Integrity sind- Tabelle mit Beispielen (wie oben)- Leere Tabelle- HaftnotizzettelZeichne in der Zwischenzeit dieselbe Tabelle auf ein Flipchart oder Whiteboard mit den folgenden drei Spalten: Perspektive, Wert / Tugend, Norm / Handlungsvorschrift (siehe unten). Diese Tabelle kann auch schon gut vor der Sitzung vorbereitet werden.Beispieltabelle:{| class="wikitable" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"| width="113" valign="top" |'''Perspektive'''| width="123" valign="top" |'''Wert / Tugend'''| width="368" valign="top" |'''Norm / Handlung'''|-| rowspan="2" width="113" valign="top" |Louise| width="123" valign="top" |Ehrlichkeit| width="368" valign="top" |Ich sollte alle Beteiligten in meinem Manuskript nennen. |-| width="123" valign="top" |Mut| width="368" valign="top" |Ich sollte mit meinem/meiner Betreuer:in sprechen.|-| width="113" valign="top" |Ben| width="123" valign="top" |Verlässlichkeit| width="368" valign="top" |Ich sollte genau das tun, was ich meinen Kolleg:innen versprochen hatte.|}Bitte nun alle Teilnehmenden, ihre Werte / Tugenden und Normen deutlich lesbar auf einen Haftnotizzettel zu schreiben. Fordere sie dann auf, zur Flipchart zu gehen, um dort ihren Namen in das Feld „Perspektive“ zu schreiben und in der zugehörigen Zeile ihre Haftnotizzettel im Feld Wert / Tugend und Norm / Handlung zu kleben. Auf diese Weise entsteht ein schöner Überblick über die verschiedenen Perspektiven, Werte / Tugenden und Normen der Gruppe.n, Werte / Tugenden und Normen der Gruppe.)
Werte/Tugenden und Normen + (Bitte die Teilnehmenden, sich die Tabelle … Bitte die Teilnehmenden, sich die Tabelle mit der Übersicht über Perspektiven, Werte / Tugenden und Normen anzusehen. Stelle zum Beispiel die folgenden Fragen, um einen Reflexionsprozess in Gang zu bringen:* Was fällt euch auf?* Welche Gemeinsamkeiten gibt es zwischen den verschiedenen Perspektiven? Welche Unterschiede gibt es zwischen den verschiedenen Perspektiven? Stehen sie im Widerspruch zueinander?* Werden die genannten Werte / Tugenden auch im Europäischen Verhaltenskodex für Integrität in der Forschung erwähnt? Falls ja, welche?* Ist es möglich, einen Wert / eine Tugend auszuwählen, die in dieser Situation am wichtigsten sein sollte? Falls ja, warum ist dieser Wert / diese Tugend am wichtigsten?* Versetze dich in die Lage der Person, die den Fall präsentiert hat: Was bräuchtest du (konkret), um den von der Gruppe ausgewählten Wert / Tugend in konkretes Verhalten umzusetzen? Gibt es irgendwelche limitierenden Rahmenbedingungen oder Einschränkungen?Notiere die Antworten der Teilnehmenden am Flipchart. Dafür kannst du Stichpunkte aufschreiben, unterschiedliche Farben zur Hervorhebung benutzen, oder vorhandene Wörter unterstreichen.Vor allem wenn du die Übung zum ersten Mal durchführst, kann es hilfreich sein, alle oben genannten Fragen anzuwenden, um eine dialogische Reflexion zu ermöglichen. Vergiss nicht, den Europäischen Verhaltenskodex für Integrität in der Forschung zu erwähnen. Du könntest sogar ein ausgedrucktes Exemplar des Kodex mitbringen, wenn du möchtest. Bei den Fragen solltest du dir nicht zu viel Zeit bei den einzelnen Fragen lassen. Wenn die Teilnehmenden anfangen abzuschweifen oder sich in einer Diskussion verlieren, solltest du sie auf die eigentliche Frage zurück lenken.Falls sich die Teilnehmenden nicht auf einen Wert / eine Tugend einigen können, ist das kein Problem. Trage dann einfach verschiedene Schlussfolgerungen in die Tabelle auf dem Flipchart ein.Tipp: Hab keine Angst vor einer schweigenden Gruppe. Lass die Leute über ihre Antwort nachdenken. Gib ihnen Zeit, über deine Fragen nachzudenken. Gib ihnen aber nicht zu viel Zeit. Wenn es keine Beiträge aus der Gruppe mehr gibt, fahre mit der Übung fort.ruppe mehr gibt, fahre mit der Übung fort.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Bitte die Teilnehmer:innen, über den Nutze … Bitte die Teilnehmer:innen, über den Nutzen eines Dialogs zu reflektieren und darüber nachzudenken, wie man einen Dialog nutzen kann, um Gruppenreflexionsprozesse anzustoßen. Konzentriere dich dabei auf allgemeine Erkenntnisse in Zusammenhang mit den Zielen der Übung. Mögliche Fragen sind:* In Anbetracht der Lernziele der Übung – was hat du gelernt? Genauer:o Inwiefern wurden die die Stärken eines Dialogs und einer Debatte bewusst?o Denkst du, die Übung hilft dabei, zu lernen, auf welche Weise man einen Dialog als Werkzeug zum Anstoßen eines Reflexionsprozesses nutzen kann?o Was hast du darüber hinaus gelernt?Cave: die Reihenfolge der Übung könnte bei den Teilnehmer:innen den Eindruck hinterlassen, eine Debatte sei „falsch“ und ein Dialog „richtig“. Nutze den letzten Schritt der Übung, um zu betonen, dass ein Dialog sinnvoll und nützlich für Reflexionsprozesse ist, aber eine Debatte in anderen Situationen mit anderen Zielsetzungen angebracht und sinnvoll ist.Zielsetzungen angebracht und sinnvoll ist.)
Der Balanceakt + (Bitte nun die Berichterstatter:innen, in a … Bitte nun die Berichterstatter:innen, in aller Kürze …* die in den Untergruppendiskussionen diskutierten Werte und tugendhaften Verhaltensweisen zusammenfassend darzustellen, einschließlich der Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten;* die Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten in der Art und Weise zusammenzufassen, wie die Teilnehmenden die mittlere Position / den Balanceakt formuliert haben (nicht die Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten selbst, sondern im Allgemeinen);Tipp: Richte den Fokus auf die Werte und mittlere Positionen (d.h. tugendhafte Verhaltensweisen) und nicht auf die spezifischen Situationen. Um nach den kurzen Zusammenfassungen der Berichterstatter:innen ein Gespräch im Plenum zu beginnen, stelle den Teilnehmer:innen die folgenden Fragen:- War es einfach oder schwierig, eine persönliche Situation zu finden und einen Wert dafür zu benennen und tugendhafte Verhaltensweisen zu identifizieren? - Habt ihr gelernt, die inhärente moralische Ambiguität von manchen Werten und Tugenden wahrzunehmen? Zum Beispiel dadurch, wie andere die Situation einschätzten oder welche Werte und Verhaltensweisen sie auswählten?- Möchte die Person, die die Situation ursprünglich präsentiert hat, beschreiben, wie sie die Übung erlebt hat?beschreiben, wie sie die Übung erlebt hat?)
Using Different Learning Taxonomies + (Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known education … Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known educational framework that offers a methodical way to classify learning objectives according to cognitive difficulty. (e.g., Adams, 2015).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000092-QINU`"' It is a hierarchical framework that uses cognitive complexity to classify learning objectives. Benjamin Bloom created it in the 1950s, and it is now a vital instrument in educational theory and practice. The taxonomy is divided into six stages: remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The levels are arranged from lower to higher order cognitive skills. Fundamentally, remembering entails recollecting words, information, and fundamental ideas. Understanding is more than just remembering concepts; it also involves understanding meanings. Applying necessitates applying knowledge to novel contexts or problem-solving. Analysing means dissecting data into its constituent elements and identifying connections between them. Making decisions based on standards and criteria is the process of evaluating. Creating, in the end, involves coming up with original concepts and/or interpretations. The goal of applying Bloom's Taxonomy to training aims and results is to enhance comprehension by considering the knowledge, skills, and competencies that the specific training programmes were created to impart. The Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, and Creating domains of Bloom's Taxonomy each reflect a different cognitive process and the depth and complexity of learning.[[File:BloomsTaxonomy.jpg|alt=|center|frame|Fig 21. Bloom’s Taxonomy (taken from the Centre for teaching, Vanderbilt University. '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000093-QINU`"') ]]All taxonomic levels are relevant irrespective of the study or career level. However, the taxonomic levels may mean different things for different individuals. For example, application of knowledge may mean engaging with research designs, but senior researchers often use more complex designs than students still learning how to do research. Nevertheless, it is essential that the learning extends beyond remembering and understanding, and that the complexity of activities at all levels gradually grow as the individual gains experience, knowledge and confidence.· '''remembering and understanding:''' focus on memorizing key ethics concepts and theories. For example, students should master basic principles and terminology related to ethics and integrity.· '''applying and analysing''': engage in practical applications and critical thinking. Apply ethics concepts to real-life scenarios, such as conducting experiments and analyzing data.· '''evaluating and creating''': evaluate research findings and create new knowledge. Encourage learners to think critically and innovate in ethical dilemmas.'"`UNIQ--references-00000094-QINU`"'nnovate in ethical dilemmas. '"`UNIQ--references-00000094-QINU`"')
Using Different Learning Taxonomies + (Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known education … Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known educational framework that offers a methodical way to classify learning objectives according to cognitive difficulty. (e.g., Adams, 2015).'"`UNIQ--ref-000000B5-QINU`"' It is a hierarchical framework that uses cognitive complexity to classify learning objectives. Benjamin Bloom created it in the 1950s, and it is now a vital instrument in educational theory and practice. The taxonomy is divided into six stages: remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The levels are arranged from lower to higher order cognitive skills. Fundamentally, remembering entails recollecting words, information, and fundamental ideas. Understanding is more than just remembering concepts; it also involves understanding meanings. Applying necessitates applying knowledge to novel contexts or problem-solving. Analysing means dissecting data into its constituent elements and identifying connections between them. Making decisions based on standards and criteria is the process of evaluating. Creating, in the end, involves coming up with original concepts and/or interpretations. The goal of applying Bloom's Taxonomy to training aims and results is to enhance comprehension by considering the knowledge, skills, and competencies that the specific training programmes were created to impart. The Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, and Creating domains of Bloom's Taxonomy each reflect a different cognitive process and the depth and complexity of learning.[[File:BloomsTaxonomy.jpg|alt=|center|frame|Fig 21. Bloom’s Taxonomy (taken from the Centre for teaching, Vanderbilt University. '"`UNIQ--nowiki-000000B6-QINU`"') ]]All taxonomic levels are relevant irrespective of the study or career level. However, the taxonomic levels may mean different things for different individuals. For example, application of knowledge may mean engaging with research designs, but senior researchers often use more complex designs than students still learning how to do research. Nevertheless, it is essential that the learning extends beyond remembering and understanding, and that the complexity of activities at all levels gradually grow as the individual gains experience, knowledge and confidence.''Remembering and understanding:''Here, the focus is on memorising key facts, concepts and theories relevant to the field of research and innovation. Understanding these foundational elements is critical to moving forward. For example, undergraduate students need to master the basic principles and terminology related to ethics and integrity to effectively navigate through more complex topics later. Similarly, individuals pursuing a PhD or who are new to academia need a solid understanding of basic concepts before they can conduct more in-depth analyses and applications, such as mastering the ethics of their own PhD research. Moreover, senior researchers may need to understand the basic concept of supervision and mentoring practices when it comes to supervising a team and PhD candidates.''Apply and analyse:''Learning should always be an active endeavour irrespective of career or studies applying and analysing knowledge. This is where the emphasis shifts to practical application and critical thinking. Early career researchers, junior professors and academics need competencies for applying the ethics and integrity concepts they have learnt to real-life scenarios in connection to conducting experiments, collecting data and critically analysing the results to gain meaningful insights. Through these activities, participants develop the skills necessary to contribute to the advancement of their field and address research questions with greater depth and sophistication. In terms of research ethics and integrity, this involves applying such knowledge and values to every step of the research.''Evaluate and create:''The highest level in Bloom’s Taxonomy involves evaluating existing knowledge and creating new knowledge. All researchers play a critical role in shaping the direction of research and innovation. They are responsible for assessing the validity and significance of research findings and identifying areas for further investigation and innovation. By synthesising existing knowledge and developing new ideas, theories or methods, researchers develop their field forward and inspire the next generation of researchers and innovators. All RE/RI training should include components, which encourage learners to extend their thinking to evaluation and creation. In practice, this involves having such a robust knowledge base and values so that even when encountering new ethical dilemmas or being posed with a novel potentially integrity-threatening situation, they can rely on having the ‘tools’ to handle the situation.'"`UNIQ--references-000000B7-QINU`"'tion. '"`UNIQ--references-000000B7-QINU`"')
Uyarlanmış ikilem oyunu + (Bu alıştırma hem büyük gruplar içerisinde … Bu alıştırma hem büyük gruplar içerisinde hem de birkaç küçük grup ile kullanılmaya uygundur. Eğer eğitim esnasında daha çok ''fikir yürütme/ yorumlama'' süreçleri üzerine eğilmek istiyorsanız oyunu küçük gruplarla oynamayı tercih edin. Ancak öncelikli hedefiniz katılımcılarda ''farkındalık yaratmaksa'' daha büyük gruplarla çalışın. Lütfen eğitim gerçekleşmeden önce bu konudaki kararınızı vermiş olun (daha fazla bilgi için '''Pratik İpuçları''' bölümüne bakınız).n '''Pratik İpuçları''' bölümüne bakınız).)
Orta Yol + (Bu alıştırmada kişisel deneyimler ve ahlak … Bu alıştırmada kişisel deneyimler ve ahlaki belirsizlik üzerine fikir yürütmeyi teşvik edeceksiniz. Bu nedenle katılımcılarınızın kendi deneyim ve fikirlerini güvenle paylaşabilecekleri bir öğrenme ortamı yaratmanız önemlidir.Alıştırmayı yönetirken katılımcılarınızın hassas noktalarını korumaya çalışın ve katılımcıları başkalarının görüşlerine saygı duymaya teşvik edin.Bunun yanı sıra, oturumdan önce katılımcılarınıza, alıştırma esnasında paylaşılan bilgilerin siz ve oturumdaki diğer katılımcılarca gizli tutulacağına ilişkin bir gizlilik beyanı imzalatmanızı tavsiye ederiz.lilik beyanı imzalatmanızı tavsiye ederiz.)
Erdemler ve Normlar + (Bu aşamada gizlilik ilkesi üzerinde durulm … Bu aşamada gizlilik ilkesi üzerinde durulması önem arz etmektedir. Oturum esnasında gerçek hayatta karşılaşılmış bir ikilem inceleneceğinden katılımcıların oturumda paylaşılan bilgiyi kesinlikle gizli tutmaları gerekmektedir. Katılımcılara, alıştırma esnasında paylaşılan bilgilerin gizli kalacağı ve eğitimden sonra imha edileceğine ilişkin bir gizlilik beyanı dağıtmanız ve imzalatmanız şiddetle tavsiye edilir.z ve imzalatmanız şiddetle tavsiye edilir.)
Erdemler ve Normlar + (Bu aşamada katılımcılardan, kendilerini va … Bu aşamada katılımcılardan, kendilerini vaka sunucusunun yerine koymalarını ve durumu daha iyi anlayabilmeleri için vakadaki hangi noktaların netleştirilmesi gerektiği üzerine düşünmelerini isteyin. Katılımcıların kendilerini vaka sunucusunun yerine koymalarını sağlayacak tüm sorular bu noktada sorulmalıdır.yacak tüm sorular bu noktada sorulmalıdır.)
Eğitimi organize etme + (Bu eğitim programı, bir bütün olarak, eğitmenlerin ciddi manada özveri göstermesini gerektirdiğinden eğitimi organize etme ve yönetme işini bir meslektaşınızla birlikte gerçekleştirmeniz şiddetle tavsiye edilir (özellikle yüz yüze oturumlar için).)
VIRT2UE Train-the-Trainer program + (Can you be too honest? This exercise helps … Can you be too honest? This exercise helps to develop moral sensitivity with respect to basic virtues related to Research Integrity (RI). In particular it fosters reflection on the inherent moral ambiguity of specific virtues and how this ambiguity looks like in concrete research practice.[[File: MPE.png|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjov1WIvKvg&list=PLabbUwyulAry4tzZ12eHl5JOJhJGiaE6k&index=5]][[File: MPE.png|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjov1WIvKvg&list=PLabbUwyulAry4tzZ12eHl5JOJhJGiaE6k&index=5]])
Introduction to the evaluation of the effectiveness of Research Ethics and Integrity (REI) training + (Challenges in assessing training effective … Challenges in assessing training effectiveness are that results are limited through extensive missing data, heterogeneity of trainings and evaluation tools, short interventions not allowing sufficient time to induce change or development, and small sample sizes. As the goals of trainings differ, different tests are used to measure those goals, making comparisons difficult. In addition, measurements take a lot of time and labour to assess and analyse, especially if the data are qualitative and learners receive feedback on their learning and development.eedback on their learning and development.)
THE PREPARED CODE: A Global Code of Conduct for Research during Pandemics + (Changes to the process of seeking informed … Changes to the process of seeking informed consent must not be allowed to compromise potential participants’ understanding of a research project. This includes ensuring that research participants do not mistake research for treatment (‘therapeutic misconception’), especially when healthcare staff rather than researchers seek consentstaff rather than researchers seek consent)
Rights of Citizen Scientists + (Citizen and participatory science form a c … Citizen and participatory science form a critical component of the broader open science framework, which seeks to make the scientific process more transparent and collaborative. UNESCO recognizes the value of involving citizens in scientific research, not only to advance scientific knowledge but also to enhance public engagement with science (UNESCO, 2021).Citizen and participatory science form a critical component of the broader open science framework, which seeks to make the scientific process more transparent and collaborative. UNESCO recognizes the value of involving citizens in scientific research, not only to advance scientific knowledge but also to enhance public engagement with science (UNESCO, 2021). Collaboration, participation, and inclusion are crucial for achieving several broader open science goals (data, collection, science literacy, dissemination of research results, implementation of evidence-based policies etc.). Nonetheless, this involvement presents challenges, such as reconciling the activism of citizen science with the discovery-oriented and objective nature of academic research (Rasmussen & Cooper, 2019) or blurring of the researchers/research subject roles in research that have largely been kept separate in traditional research ethics guidance (Resnik, 2019). Issues of potential conflicts of interest may arise when citizen scientists are motivated by personal or group interests. Addressing these challenges requires transparency about research goals, openness regarding the roles and interests of all scientists, and ethical handling of open data. The field is rapidly evolving, and many ethical considerations are still being developed and resolved.'''References'''#Rasmussen, L. M., & Cooper, C. (2019). Citizen science ethics. ''Citizen Science: Theory and Practice'', 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.235#Resnik, D.B. (2019). Citizen scientists as human subjects: Ethical issues. ''Citizen Science: Theory and Practice'', 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.150#UNESCO (2021). Recommendation on Open Science. https://doi.org/10.54677/MNMH8546on Open Science. https://doi.org/10.54677/MNMH8546)