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

Varieties of goodness in research - a rotary style exercise (variation to original VIRT2UE exercise)) + (Plenary discussion of oneVariety of Goodne … Plenary discussion of oneVariety of Goodness in research. The trainer prepared a presentation including:*Brief explanation of this Variety of Goodness*Links the Variety of Goodness to research*Links ECoC to this Variety of Goodness*Links examples for the preparation sheet by participants to the Variety of GoodnessIn each step of the reflection on this Variety of Goodness, the trainer asks the participants to also name examples of research, the code of conduct and own experiences., the code of conduct and own experiences.)
Reflecting on Experiences and Practicing Exercises + (Practice again (elements and variations of) the exercises supervised by a trainer. Discuss with your trainers and with the group the possibility to adapt the training materials.)
Debate and Dialogue + (Present an example (hypothetical) research … Present an example (hypothetical) research integrity case with a clearly formulated moral dilemma (please see practical tips for an example). While choosing a case, be aware of the target group. Pick a case that is recognizable for the target group - it should be part of their practice. It is important to choose a case which is short and has a clearly formulated dilemma (2 clear choices). Display the case description clearly on a monitor during the debate/dialogue. Participants should be able to re-read the case description at any time. Make sure you give enough information about the case, otherwise participants will start to ask questions about the case itself. to ask questions about the case itself. )
The Middle Position + (Prior to the exercise, get in contact with … Prior to the exercise, get in contact with participants and ask them to reflect on a personal case or situation from their work as a researcher in which they experienced a kind of moral doubt about what happened or about what they could/should do/have done (i.e. cases in which it is absolutely clear that something is morally wrong with respect to are not good cases). It is important that participants reflect on their own experiences, yet the case does not have to be written down beforehand. It does not have to be a dramatic case, ordinary cases of questionable research practices are also suitable.able research practices are also suitable.)
The Middle Position + (Prior to the session you will be asked to sign a confidentiality statement to formalize the expectation that information shared during the exercise will be kept confidential by you and the other participants in the session.)
Virtues and Norms + (Prior to the session you will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement in order to formalize the fact that the information shared during the exercise will be kept confidential and will be destroyed after the training.)
05 - REalistiC Decisions: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity + (Produce a synopsis of the case *Only include the facts of the case *If the issue is ambiguous, then attempt to clarify what issue or set of issues are at stake)
Eğitimi organize etme + (Programı ve takvimi tasarladıktan sonra eğ … 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.n örnek davet mektubunu kullanabilirsiniz.)
Practicing Reflection in Dialogue + (Provide contact information in case of que … 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.or to the follow up participatory session.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Präsentiere ein (hypothetisches) Fallbeisp … Präsentiere ein (hypothetisches) Fallbeispiel mit einer Research Integrity – Fragestellung, einschließlich eines klar formulierten moralischen Dilemmas (siehe „Praktische Tipps“ für ein Beispiel).Wichtig bei der Auswahl des Fallbeispiels: * Berücksichtige deine Zielgruppe, d.h. du solltest ein Fallbeispiel auswählen, das im Erfahrungshorizont der Teilnehmenden liegt, also z.B. einen Bestandteil ihres Arbeitsalltags beschreibt. * Wähle ein Fallbeispiel, das kurz formuliert ist und ein klar formuliertes moralisches Dilemma beinhaltet (d.h. es gibt zwei distinkte Handlungsmöglichkeiten).Zeige dieses Fallbeispiel deutlich lesbar während der Debatte / dem Dialog (z.B. auf einem Handout, einem Monitor, oder über den Beamer). Den Teilnehmenden sollte es möglich sein, die Fallbeschreibung während der Übung durchzulesen. Präsentiere den Fall mit genügend Informationen und lass Zeit für Rückfragen der Teilnehmenden, da diese Fragen ansonsten in der Übung auftauchen und die Debatte / den Dialog unterbrechen würden. Debatte / den Dialog unterbrechen würden.)
Preparatory Reading: Introduction to Concepts & Themes + (Read about the concept of debate and dialogue and reflect on the differences between the two. Open the page about [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:6217d06b-c907-4b09-af4e-b4c8a17b9847 dialogue versus debate].)
Preparatory Reading: Introduction to Concepts & Themes + (Read about virtue ethics and its relevance for research integrity. Open the page about [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:520b3bc7-a6ab-4617-95f2-89c9dee31c53 virtues in research integrity].)
Modified Dilemma Game + (Read the instructions. Please note that th … Read the instructions. Please note that there are some differences between the original game and the modified RDG in terms of aims and applications. In the following steps the procedures for the use of the modified version are explained. This version requires participants not merely to play the game, but at the same time to reflect on their justifications, analyze their and others’ discussion processes, and work together to relate the case at hand with the elements of the European Code of Conduct and research integrity virtues. This version therefore takes longer, and is more demanding.Before the session:If using the Dilemma Game app: - Ask participants to download the [https://www.eur.nl/en/about-eur/policy-and-regulations/integrity/research-integrity/dilemma-game app]- Ask participants to watch the introductory [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKhT7qHh9T8&t=8s video]ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKhT7qHh9T8&t=8s video])
Risks to the environment, animals, plants, and ecosystems + (Read the slides and complete the exercises below!)
Quality of research outputs and data sets + (Read the slides below and complete the interactive exercises!)
‘And the band played on’ movie fragment no. 3 + (Reflect again. What differences did they experience? What felt better? Do they understand the choice of the other team and feel understood by that team themselves, and how did the style of conversation influence that?)
Practicing Reflection in Dialogue + (Reflect on your future role as facilitator and ask clarifying questions to understand how to act as a trainer in your own work setting.)
Reflecting on Experiences and Practicing Exercises + (Remind participants about the fact that in … Remind participants about the fact that in order to become certified VIRT2UE trainers, they have to train 10 others, preferably trainers. If it is not feasible to train 10 trainers they may also train researchers who have the potential to be come trainers.ho have the potential to be come trainers.)
Reflecting on Experiences and Practicing Exercises + (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.)
Self Declaration Approach - a Reflection on the Varieties of Goodness in Research + (Remind participants that responses provide … Remind participants that responses provided in the self declaration sheet will be used for, and only for, class purposes, and that they should only share information that they are comfortable sharing with the class and that would not necessitate mandatory reporting. It is strongly recommended to ask participants to sign a confidentiality agreement.pants to sign a confidentiality agreement.)
Interim Practice Work + (Remind your trainees to send you the fille … Remind your trainees to send you the filled in '''[https://www.dropbox.com/s/1fmppqv189jxlqj/Self%20reflection%20form.pdf?dl=0 self reflection forms]''' in due time. After you have collected them, you analyse them to learn about how the trainees experienced the exercises. In addition to this, you can consider directly asking the trainees what they would like to practice or discuss during the follow up session. This will be helpful in allocating practice time during the session.locating practice time during the session.)
05 - REalistiC Decisions: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity + (Review my Early View and associated reason … Review my Early View and associated reasons by addressing each of the following themes and questions: '''Normative Standards'''''"How do normative frameworks help us?"''In order to answer this question, we need: *A basic knowledge of the appropriate regulations that apply to the issue;*To be able to use these regulations to analyse our Early View;*To revise our Early View and to provide reasons for any revisions.'''Experience'''''"How have we approached this issue before?"''In order to answer this question, we need: *To access past decisions;*To compare past cases and the current case and determine whether previous decisions are relevant;*To use disagreement to develop new standards for guiding future considerations;*To be able to explain why, if relevant, we haven’t followed such precedent.'''Expertise'''''"What expertise has been applied to this before?"''To answer this question, we need to: *Access independent expert review;*Access an up-to-date library of authoritative guidance;*Balance guidance documents and judge the relative authority of guidance documents;*Provide reasons if our decisions run contrary to guidance.'''Empathy'''''"What views and opinions do other parties have?"''We turn to the views of those with a legitimate interest in the case (for example, the accused, the complainant, individuals involved with the case, and the public).To answer this question, we need to: *Identify all those with an interest in the case and see it ‘through their eyes’;*Recognize limitations to our empathy;*Confirm or refute any ‘empathy-based decisions’ using answers to the other questions listed above;'''Evidence'''''"What evidence is there on this issue?"''We turn to any published research concerning similar cases. However, we need to be careful when forming prescriptive conclusions based on factual premises. After all, the quality of the evidence may be questionable and there may be significant normative and factual differences between the case in question and situations discussed in published research.In order to answer this question, we need: *To locate, assess, and apply published evidence;*To recognize the proper place of facts when making judgments;*To encourage published research on research integrity and research ethics.'''Expediency'''''"What is possible or realistic in the circumstances?"''We need to ensure that we have not interpreted the case against sets of unrealistic standards. Expediency is built on a realistic evaluation of research constraints and consequences and imposes proportionate and realistic conditions.In order to answer this question, we need to: *Understand and accommodate realistic standards when assessing the case;*Judge when expediency is adequate justification;*Balance expediency and fair standards when forming a judgment about a case.'''Escape'''''"How can we manage this problem of our disagreement?"''In order to answer this question, we might be required to: *Agree to disagree (if it will not affect the final judgment);*Seek elaboration on any of the answers to the questions listed above;*Vote on a set of judgments;*Consider alternatives. to the questions listed above; *Vote on a set of judgments; *Consider alternatives.)
Der Selbstauskunfts-Ansatz: Eine Reflexion über das Konzept des Guten in der Wissenschaft + (Sammle die Arbeitsblätter der Teilnehmende … Sammle die Arbeitsblätter der Teilnehmenden rechtzeitig ein und mache dich mit den Antworten der Teilnehmenden vertraut. Diese Gedanken und Antworten der Teilnehmenden werden für den Workshop sehr nützlich sein.Bereite eine Präsentation vor, um die Reflexionsprozesse während des Workshops zu erleichtern. Falls den Teilnehmenden das Video über die Typologien der Güte in der Wissenschaft gezeigt wurde, kann folgende Präsentation verwendet werden: [https://www.dropbox.com/s/a30do4g82u2a4fb/SDA%20Sample%20ppt%20on%20Goodness%20simplified%20version%20(1).pptx?dl=0 Beispielpräsentation] Falls den Teilnehmenden das Video nicht gezeigt wurde, kann folgende Präsentation gezeigt werden: [https://www.dropbox.com/s/xwiv7e0hggu3h9c/SDA%20Sample%20ppt%20on%20Goodness%20extended%20version.pptx?dl=0 Beispielpräsentation 2].Die Präsentationen können nach Bedarf überarbeitet werden.en können nach Bedarf überarbeitet werden.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Schau dir folgendes Video an, um einen Ein … Schau dir folgendes Video an, um einen Eindruck von der VIRT2UE “Debatte & Dialog Übung” zu bekommen:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=249umsbOIG0&list=PLabbUwyulAry4tzZ12eHl5JOJhJGiaE6k&index=6Debatte und Dialog sind zwei unterschiedliche Modelle der Kommunikation. Das folgende Video erkundet die Unterschiede zwischen den Modellen und hilft den Zuschauer:innen, die Dynamiken, die bei den Beteiligten ausgelöst werden, besser zu reflektieren. Die Unterschiede sind etwas ausführlicher auf der Themenseite “[https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:6217d06b-c907-4b09-af4e-b4c8a17b9847 Dialog versus Debatte]” beschrieben.[[File:ByVirtueof.png|center|frame|[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-nI32JBOyo]]] rtueof.png|center|frame|[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-nI32JBOyo]]] )
Debate and Dialogue + (Share your experiences of participating and facilitating the exercise with the other participants.)

‘And the band played on’ movie fragment no. 3 + (Show the movie fragment.)

Exploring Training Materials on Open Science + (Six different modules on responsible open … Six different modules on responsible open science can be found [[Guide:E525ee0d-0d7e-4ba5-b19b-89e4a5029b2f|here]], on the Embassy of Good Science and [https://classroom.eneri.eu/node/82 ENERI] platforms. [https://zenodo.org/records/11671024 Open Science Learning Gate] developed by [https://community.embassy.science/c/nerq/105 NERQ] offers the possibility to align trainings with the principles of the research community. To enhance the quality of open science practices, the ‘Open Science Learning Gate’ seeks to unite the research community while aligning and standardizing both a) customized and b) high-quality OS training programs. and b) high-quality OS training programs.)
Uyarlanmış ikilem oyunu + (Sizden ve grubunuzdan, oturum başında sizlere verilmiş olan tabloları doldurmanız ve söz konusu ikilemle ilişkili olan ECoC konularını belirlemeniz istenecektir ('''Pratik ipuçları''' bölümünde bulunan Tablo 1, 2 ve 3’e bakınız).)
Uyarlanmış ikilem oyunu + (Sizlerden grup içerisinde yaptığınız tartışmanın kısa bir sunumunu gerçekleştirmeniz istenecektir. Yürüttüğünüz tartışmanın sonuçlarını sunmak üzere grup üyelerinden birini sözcü olarak seçebilirsiniz.)
Werte/Tugenden und Normen + (Sobald die präsentierte Situation für alle … 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.dung gebracht werden können und umgekehrt.)
Öz beyan yaklaşımı, araştırmada iyiliğin farklı şekilleri üzerine fikir yürütme + (Son teslim tarihine kadar tüm formları top … Son teslim tarihine kadar tüm formları toplayın ve katılımcıların yanıtlarını inceleyin. Bu yanıtlar oturumun içeriğini oluşturacaktır. Ayrıca, oturum esnasında fikir yürütme süreçlerini kolaylaştırması amacıyla bir PowerPoint sunumu hazırlamayı unutmayın.r PowerPoint sunumu hazırlamayı unutmayın.)
Uyarlanmış ikilem oyunu + (Sonuç kısmında sizden genel olarak süreç ü … Sonuç kısmında sizden genel olarak süreç üzerine fikir yürütmeniz ve bu alıştırma bağlamında öğrenme hedeflerinin karşılanıp karşılanmadığına ilişkin bir değerlendirme yapmanız istenecektir. Bunun için, bu alıştırma ile neler öğrendiğiniz üzerine grup olarak kısa bir diyalog yürütmeniz talep edilecektir. Bu noktada sizden aşağıdakilere benzer sorulara yanıt aramanız istenebilir: - Seçilen ikilem için ilgili prensip ve erdemleri belirlemek kolay oldu mu?- Bu alıştırma sizin resmi olarak tanımlanmış prensipleri (ECoC) tespit edip bunlarla vakalar arasında bağlantı kurmanıza yardımcı oldu mu?- Oyunu oynayan katılımcıların büyük çoğunluğu varılan nihai karara muvafakat etti mi?- Anlaşmazlığa yol açan başlıca noktalar nelerdi?- Katılımcıların bazı noktalarda hemfikir olmamasına sebep olan şeyler nelerdi (örn., kişilerin deneyimlerindeki, eğitimlerindeki, arka planlarındaki, değerlerindeki, normlarındaki vb. farklılıklar)- Herhangi bir alternatif seçenek önerildi mi?- Tartışma sonucunda herhangi bir katılımcı fikrini değiştirdi mi?- Sizin iş ortamınızda ahlaki olarak iyi olana ulaşmak için neler gerekli? - Tartışmada kullanılan en ikna edici argümanlar hangileriydi?- Hangi noktalarda yeterince fikir birliğine varılmadığını düşünüyorsunuz?- Gelecekte iş yaşamınızda bu gibi ikilemlerle en iyi hangi şekilde başa çıkabilirsiniz? en iyi hangi şekilde başa çıkabilirsiniz?)
IRECS Training format (template) + (Split up the group (if more than 10 people … Split up the group (if more than 10 people attend) in smaller groups. For this session you can pick among the following activities. Each of these activities have been presented in a separate module and applied to a specific topic. You can use these instructions as a guide and adapt the format to your training topic. · Case study· Mind mapping· [[Instruction:1d832939-90e0-4879-a557-e60627c0555e|Role play]]At the end of the group work facilitate a plenary reflection, reporting back and harvesting results of subgroups’ discussion.ry reflection, reporting back and harvesting results of subgroups’ discussion.)
Debate and Dialogue + (Start a debate: invite both subgroups to c … Start a debate: invite both subgroups to convince the other side of their position. As a moderator, you can challenge the participants if only a few people talk. In general, try not to intervene too much during the debate, even when participants start raising their voices. Stop the debate if you see people becoming too emotional and ask them what is triggering them to become emotional in terms of aggression, sadness etc. In case the participants are debating too politely, you should intervene actively as a moderator and challenge both groups to convince each other. You might even make stimulating comments such as:***Come on, do you really think that …….? (repeat what has been said by one of the participants)*What makes you think that this argument counts?makes you think that this argument counts?)
Virtues and Norms + (Start the session by welcoming participant … Start the session by welcoming participants and by giving a short introduction to the exercise. Explain the aim of the exercise properly. Please keep in mind that this exercise is not about personal opinions/judgements on what each participant would do in the case, or to justify or condemn what the case-owner did (or did not) do. Participants should be willing to engage in a dialogue and learn from each other. This should be stressed at the beginning of the session. Also, as a facilitator you should take into account that being a case presenter can be challenging and emotionally burdensome. It is your responsibility to protect the case presenter and call for a time-out in case the conversation becomes too heavy or uncomfortable. tion becomes too heavy or uncomfortable. )
Debatte und Dialog + (Stelle die Übung vor, indem du … * die Zi … Stelle die Übung vor, indem du …* die Ziele oder den Zweck der Übung erklärst: ein moralisches Dilemma erkennen, den Unterschied zwischen einer Debatte und einem Dialog erfahren, und zu verstehen, wie eine dialogische Haltung dazu beitragen kann, in anderen Reflexionsprozesse anzuregen* die Wichtigkeit dessen im Kontext von „Research Integrity“ erklärst. Betone, dass es bei dieser Übung vor allem um den Prozess der erlebten Interaktion geht. Das bedeutet, dass der Inhalt des Fallbeispiels weniger wichtig ist, sondern lediglich als Platzhalter genutzt wird, um den Prozess der Debatte und des Dialogs zu begünstigen.er Debatte und des Dialogs zu begünstigen.)
Debate and Dialogue + (Stop the dialogue after 10 minutes and ref … Stop the dialogue after 10 minutes and reflect with the group on the differences between debate and dialogue by referring/asking questions about:***Experiences, feelings during the debate and dialogue,*The extent of understanding each other,*The group dynamics (who was talking, did everybody had a say etc.),*The understanding of the content of the case (motives; interests),*Other outcomes of a debate and dialogue (e.g. gaining new insights).Reflect with the group on the differences between debate and dialogue. You may look at additional questions in the practical tips section. Take notes of the reflection on a flip-chart.e notes of the reflection on a flip-chart.)
Organizing the training + (Sufficient time should be given to trainee … Sufficient time should be given to trainees to prepare for the first session and for practicing the exercises in between the sessions. When preparing the schedule for the training you: a. Distribute preparation materials (including online modules and assignments) at least one month prior to the first participatory session. b. Plan at least two months’ time in between the first participatory session(s) and the follow up session.tory session(s) and the follow up session.)
Uyarlanmış ikilem oyunu + (Sunumunuzun ardından sizden diğer katılımc … Sunumunuzun ardından sizden diğer katılımcıların söylediklerini aktif bir biçimde dinlemeniz istenebilir. Oyunun küçük gruplar halinde oynanması durumunda, birbirinize sorular sormanız ve ikilemleri, yapılan seçimlerin ardında yatan sebepleri ve hatta daha genel temaları belirleyebilmeniz için toplu bir bilgilendirme oturumu yapılması faydalı olabilir.ndirme oturumu yapılması faydalı olabilir.)
Uyarlanmış ikilem oyunu + (Talimatları okuyun. Lütfen orijinal oyun k … Talimatları okuyun. Lütfen orijinal oyun kiti ile uyarlanmış RİO arasında amaçlar ve uygulama açısından farklılıklar olduğunu unutmayın. Bundan sonraki adımlarda oyunun uyarlanmış versiyonunun kullanımına ilişkin prosedürler anlatılacaktır. Bu versiyonda katılımcıların yalnızca oyunu oynamalarını değil, aynı zamanda kendi temellendirmeleri üzerine fikir yürütmelerini, kendilerinin ve diğer katılımcıların tartışma süreçlerini analiz etmelerini ve ele alınan vaka ile ECoC’un içeriği ve AD erdemleri arasında ilişki kurmak için birlikte çalışmalarını gerektirir. Bu nedenle bu versiyonun uygulanması daha uzun sürer ve daha zorludur.Oturumdan önce:- Tercih kartlarının çıktısını alın.- Kullanılacak olan ikileme ilişkin açıklamaları içeren bir PPT sunumu hazırlayın ya da bu bilgileri içeren bir belge hazırlayıp çıktısını alın.- Tabloların çıktısını alın.lın. - Tabloların çıktısını alın.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Teile die Erfahrungen, die du bei der Teilnahme oder Durchführung dieser Übung gemacht hast, mit den anderen Teilnehmer:innen.)
Debatte und Dialog + (Teile die Gruppe in zwei Subgruppen auf un … Teile die Gruppe in zwei Subgruppen auf und teile jeder Gruppe mit, welche Seite des Dilemmas sie verteidigen soll. Einteilung der Gruppen:* Zur Aufteilung der Gruppe hast du zwei Möglichkeiten: a) du lässt die Teilnehmenden sich selbst einteilen; b) du als Trainer:in teilst die Subgruppen ein. * Beide Varianten haben Vor- und Nachteile. Variante A: die Teilnehmenden werden sich wahrscheinlich mehr mit ihrer Subgruppe identifizieren und ihre Positionen engagierter verteidigen; Variante B: die Teilnehmenden lernen, wie sie eine Position verteidigen, die sie eventuell nicht selbst vertreten. Gesetzt dem Fall, deine Gesamtgruppe besteht aus Personen unterschiedlicher Hierarchiepositionen (z.B. Supervisoren und Promovierende), dann kann es vorteilhaft sein, dass du als Trainer:in die Gruppen aufteilst. Die zugeteilten Teilnehmer:innen werden es dann als leichter empfinden, eine Gegenposition gegenüber einer hierarchisch höher gestellten Person zu verteidigen.]Ist genügend Platz im Raum vorhanden, positioniere die zwei Subgruppen so, dass sie sich gegenseitig ansehen. Die zu verteidigenden gegenüberliegenden Positionen in der Debatte spiegeln sich so in der räumlichen Position wider, was den Effekt der Übung verstärkt.Gib beiden Gruppen 3-5 Minuten Zeit, um ihre Argumente zu besprechen und eine Strategie zu diskutieren, wie die andere Gruppe von der eigenen Position überzeugt werden kann. Danach kann die Debatte gestartet werden. Danach kann die Debatte gestartet werden.)
Der Selbstauskunfts-Ansatz: Eine Reflexion über das Konzept des Guten in der Wissenschaft + (Teile die Teilnehmenden in Kleingruppen vo … Teile die Teilnehmenden in Kleingruppen von 3 bis 5 Personen auf und bitte sie, ihre Gedanken und Beiträge aus dem Selbstauskunfts-Arbeitsblatt miteinander zu diskutieren und diese Ideen mit den Tugenden und Werten sowie der Research Integrity in Verbindung zu bringen. Um den Reflexionsprozess anzuregen, gib den Teilnehmenden die folgende Liste an Fragen:1. Teile deiner Kleingruppe mit, was du in dem Selbstauskunfts-Arbeitsblatt über die verschiedenen Arten des Guten geschrieben hast. Erkläre anhand deines Beispiels, warum dieses Beispiel eine bestimmte Art des Guten darstellt. Gib der Kleingruppe die Gelegenheit, dir Fragen zu stellen.2. Diskutiert für jede Art des Guten, was passieren kann, wenn diese Art des Guten nicht mehr vorhanden ist. 3. Gibt es Arten des Guten, die für die Research Integrity weniger relevant sind?4. Sind Tugenden oder Werte notwendig, um jede Art des Guten zu erreichen?Gib den Teilnehmenden 20 bis 30 Minuten Zeit, um zu diskutieren. In der Zeit sollen sie sich auch auf eine Person einigen, die später die wichtigsten Erkenntnisse der Gruppe präsentiert.gsten Erkenntnisse der Gruppe präsentiert.)
The TRUST Code in 45 Minutes + (Thanks for your interest in the TRUST Code … Thanks for your interest in the TRUST Code and in this short training. We hope you will be able to use it to bring more equity to the world of research.Doris Schroeder, Kate Chatfield, Michelle Singh.Further reading: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-023-02581-4 Privilege and prejudice must be recognized for equitable research partnerships]nized for equitable research partnerships])
Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide + (The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effect … The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programmes achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),2. learning (knowledge, content),3. behaviour (acting in the research community),4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).'"`UNIQ--ref-000000BF-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000C0-QINU`"'Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different times to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:• during the training (learning process),• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build a culture of integrity.Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2). By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).{| class="wikitable"|+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training!Tool for collecting learning outputs!Details!Analysis instrument|-|'''''ProLearning'' app'''|''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]|learning analytics|-|'''Engagement app'''|App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''|App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Pre-post texts'''|Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Learning diaries'''|Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Group reports'''|Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Group discussions'''|Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Group dynamics'''|''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/|learning analytics|-|'''Online learning platform'''|Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.|statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria|-|'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''|Use either of the two forms measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.|statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Retention check'''|After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Vignettes'''|This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context|statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria|-|'''National surveys'''|Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.|statistics, REI leadership framework|}Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (throughout the training guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).'"`UNIQ--references-000000C1-QINU`"'rget groups). '"`UNIQ--references-000000C1-QINU`"')
Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide + (The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effect … The BEYOND Trainer Guide introduces effectiveness measures to help trainers assess whether the training provided is impactful and beneficial. The versatile evaluation tools (developed in WP4) are designed to be applicable to various target groups and compatible with a variety of training activities and resources. Such evaluation measures are often absent in training resources, yet they provide trainers with a valuable mechanism to ensure how effectively training supports learning. Understanding how training facilitates learning and development is necessary in the process of fostering and strengthening integrity in the research community. Provision of training is a necessary component of the overall building of a culture of integrity. Yet training, the effects of which are not monitored, falls short of its potential to mirror the change it contributes to the research community. Therefore, in the orchard approach, learning and development provides important information about the readiness of the community to build a culture of integrity. Evaluating training effectiveness to ensure training programs achieve their intended outcomes is crucial because it connects training investments to tangible results, ensuring that the effort put into developing and delivering training is worthwhile, and for pinpointing further development needs.Effectiveness of research ethics and integrity (REI) training can be viewed through an established effectiveness framework, which identifies four outcome domains, namely:1. reactions (participants’ self-assessment),2. learning (knowledge, content),3. behaviour (acting in the research community),4. results (e.g. institutional outcomes).'"`UNIQ--ref-000000D2-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000000D3-QINU`"'Evaluating development of ethical competencies should be determined through done as a system to get a more holistic picture. To do this, one can combine different forms of measurement, such as self-assessment and facilitator feedback as well as attitudes and behaviour treats (in tasks that display REI competencies in the research community, like research proposals, ethics sections of theses, articles, etc.). Furthermore, measurement could take place at different time points to gain insight into the learning process, learning outcome, and long-term implications, namely:• during the training (learning process),• right after the training – students' and facilitator’s self-reports,• later as part of another event or course where the display of REI competencies is expected (like RE section in theses and articles, research proposal, evaluation of RE situation in the department, etc.)It is also important to consider what to do with the results, that is what kind of changes are necessary to improve teaching and/or the environment to build the culture of integrity.Different tools can be used to collect various learning outputs and analysis instruments can be implemented to analyse the information that has been collected (Table 2) By analysis instruments we mean the taxonomies of learning and application of theoretical models, such as levels of reflection, ethical principles and so on (if data available are mainly in a qualitative format) or statistics and learning analytics (if the data are mainly in quantitative format).{| class="wikitable"|+Table 1: Tools and analytical instruments for collecting learning outputs in research ethics and integrity training!Tool for collecting learning outputs!Details!Analysis instrument|-|'''''ProLearning'' app'''|''ProLearning'': [http://www.prolearning.realto.ch/ www.prolearning.realto.ch]|learning analytics|-|'''Engagement app'''|App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''|App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] (for copying and editing)|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Pre-post texts'''|Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Learning diaries'''|Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria|-|'''Group reports'''|Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Group discussions'''|Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Group dynamics'''|''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/|learning analytics|-|'''Online learning platform'''|Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.|statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria|-|'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''|Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.|statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Retention check'''|After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria|-|'''Vignettes'''|This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context|statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria|-|'''National surveys'''|Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.|statistics, REI leadership framework|}Evaluation tools can give further insight into the effectiveness of the training and materials proposed. This will help trainers to adjust training content and delivery methods to improve trainees’ learning experience and outcomes. We propose mixing various tools for collecting learning outputs and adjusting them to the intended target groups (thoughout the trainig guide suggestions are provided on which tools would be most suitable for various target groups).'"`UNIQ--references-000000D4-QINU`"'rget groups). '"`UNIQ--references-000000D4-QINU`"')
Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide + (The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, … The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrityFacilitation for using existing RE/RI training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!ide, a joyful journey through the orchard!)
Introduction to the BEYOND Trainer Guide + (The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, … The BEYOND approach - ‘it’s not the apple, but the orchard’ - reflects the idea that integrity is upheld as a collaborative effort. This is why it is important that training also models the collaborative way. Cases have the capacity to open up discussion space for the complexities of integrity and ethics in research, again, guiding learners to think of the full complexity, not just individuals, but also other systemic levels, including meso and macro levels, that is organisation, research community, and national, international and global context. Scaffolding provides a technique acknowledging where the individual or even a team or research community is at and designing the next steps to facilitate learning and development eventually leading to better alignment with the highest ethical and integrity standards. The point of departure is that there is always room for improvement, even in the strongest of research communities and the work starts with acknowledging status quo and identifying the next goals, which are within reach, irrespective of whether we envision the learning of individuals or communities. With these approaches; case-based and collaborative learning and scaffolding we believe training is well geared towards nurturing the orchard.The BEYOND Trainer Guide goes beyond simply listing training materials; it adds value by explaining various pedagogical approaches that can be applied to enhance the use of different materials. It shows how learning taxonomies can be applied to create learning-focused training (as opposed to mere information transmission) irrespective of which materials produced in EU-funded projects that are implemented. We have structured the material according to target group, so that trainers can easily identify materials that are suitable for the target group they are training.Additionally, the content is also structured according to the type of learning activities to support those trainers who wish to work using specific activities but may hesitate whether they are suitable for a particular target group, or simply would like to know more about the activity itself.To summarise, the BEYOND approach is manifested in the Trainer Guide as:- A proposal for a research-based approach to an ‘orchard pedagogy’- Suggestions for measuring training effect to gain an indication of the preparedness of the research community to develop a culture of integrityFacilitation for using existing research ethics and integrity training resources by providing two alternative structures for trainers, including one, which addresses various actors in ‘the orchard’ through a career-level approach. We wish trainers and other readers, as well as learners taking part in trainings and learning activities utilising the resources referred to in the BEYOND Trainer Guide, a joyful journey through the orchard!ide, a joyful journey through the orchard!)
Training Initiatives for Research Ethics and Integrity + (The Bridging Integrity in Higher Education … The Bridging Integrity in Higher Education, Business, and Society ([https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE]) project aimed at connecting integrity practices across academia, research, business, and society. BRIDGE targets early-career researchers (master’s and PhD students) and their supervisors, with the first step focused on analysing integrity practices across these fields. The project will develop checklists, open educational resources (including gamified tools), and training to bridge gaps between academic and research integrity.s between academic and research integrity.)
INTEGRITY High School Research Integrity Course + (The Data Transmission module is designed t … The Data Transmission module is designed to provide a practical experience of how information and data gets misunderstood, distorted, and reinterpreted as it is transmitted between people. This module is based on the ‘childrens game of ‘Telephone’’ which is used to illustrate the importance of tracking down the original source of any story or piece of data, especially if this data is to be used for research or schoolwork. By systematically playing the game and reflecting on its results, the importance of responsibility in research; how and when to verify a message; how to recognize a piece of information as trustworthy; and the role played by trust in data transmission protocols will be highlighted. In addition, the student will develop a personal awareness of how information is transmitted through listening, hearing, and understanding. Students will also develop an appreciation of how this is closely linked to the data protocols of sending, accepting, and processing.ols of sending, accepting, and processing.)
The TRUST Code in 45 Minutes + (The TRUST Code aims to promote equitable research partnerhsips in international research. Why is this important? Browse through the next four steps of this module to find out.)