{"title":"Fostering Integrity in Research","authors":"ProTon Europe","doi":"10.17226/21896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Of the many interventions that might be used to improve the responsible conduct of research, educational interventions are among the most frequently employed. However, educational interventions come in many forms and have proven of varying effectiveness. Recognition of this point has led to calls for the systematic evaluation of responsible conduct of research educational programs. In the present effort, the basic principles underlying evaluation of educational programs are discussed. Subsequently, the application of these principles in the evaluation of responsible conduct of research educational programs is described. It is concluded that systematic evaluation of educational programs not only allow for the appraisal of instructional effectiveness but also allows for progressive refinement of educational initiatives. Ethics in the sciences and engineering is of concern not only because of its impact on progress in the research enterprise but also because the work of scientists and engineers impacts the lives of many people. Recognition of this point has led to a number of initiatives intended to improve the ethical conduct of investigators (National Academy of Engineering, 2009; National Institute of Medicine, 2002; National Academy of Sciences, 1992). Although a number of interventions have been proposed as a basis for improving ethical conduct, for example development of ethical guidelines, open data access, and better mentoring, perhaps the most widely applied approach has been ethics education (Council of Graduate Schools, 2012)—an intervention often referred to as training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). When one examines the available literature on RCR training, it is apparent that a wide variety of approaches have been employed. Some RCR courses are based on a self-paced, online, instructional framework (e.g. Braunschweiger and Goodman, 2007). Other RCR courses involve face-to-face instruction over longer periods of time using realistic exercises and cases (e.g. Kligyte, Marcy, Waples, Sevier, Godfrey, Mumford, and Hougen, 2008). Some RCR courses 1 As the committee launched this study, members realized that questions related to the effectiveness of Responsible Conduct of Research education programs and how they might be improved were an essential part of the study task. A significant amount of work has been done to explore these topics. This work has yielded important insights, but additional research is needed to strengthen the evidence base relevant to several key policy questions. The committee asked one of the leading researchers in this field, Michael D. Mumford, to prepare a review characterizing the current state of knowledge and describing future priorities and pathways for assessing and improving RCR education programs. The resulting review constitutes important source material for Chapter 10 of the report. The committee also believes that the review adds value to this report a as a standalone document, and is including it as an appendix.","PeriodicalId":100659,"journal":{"name":"IMPACT of Computing in Science and Engineering","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"119","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IMPACT of Computing in Science and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17226/21896","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 119
Abstract
Of the many interventions that might be used to improve the responsible conduct of research, educational interventions are among the most frequently employed. However, educational interventions come in many forms and have proven of varying effectiveness. Recognition of this point has led to calls for the systematic evaluation of responsible conduct of research educational programs. In the present effort, the basic principles underlying evaluation of educational programs are discussed. Subsequently, the application of these principles in the evaluation of responsible conduct of research educational programs is described. It is concluded that systematic evaluation of educational programs not only allow for the appraisal of instructional effectiveness but also allows for progressive refinement of educational initiatives. Ethics in the sciences and engineering is of concern not only because of its impact on progress in the research enterprise but also because the work of scientists and engineers impacts the lives of many people. Recognition of this point has led to a number of initiatives intended to improve the ethical conduct of investigators (National Academy of Engineering, 2009; National Institute of Medicine, 2002; National Academy of Sciences, 1992). Although a number of interventions have been proposed as a basis for improving ethical conduct, for example development of ethical guidelines, open data access, and better mentoring, perhaps the most widely applied approach has been ethics education (Council of Graduate Schools, 2012)—an intervention often referred to as training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). When one examines the available literature on RCR training, it is apparent that a wide variety of approaches have been employed. Some RCR courses are based on a self-paced, online, instructional framework (e.g. Braunschweiger and Goodman, 2007). Other RCR courses involve face-to-face instruction over longer periods of time using realistic exercises and cases (e.g. Kligyte, Marcy, Waples, Sevier, Godfrey, Mumford, and Hougen, 2008). Some RCR courses 1 As the committee launched this study, members realized that questions related to the effectiveness of Responsible Conduct of Research education programs and how they might be improved were an essential part of the study task. A significant amount of work has been done to explore these topics. This work has yielded important insights, but additional research is needed to strengthen the evidence base relevant to several key policy questions. The committee asked one of the leading researchers in this field, Michael D. Mumford, to prepare a review characterizing the current state of knowledge and describing future priorities and pathways for assessing and improving RCR education programs. The resulting review constitutes important source material for Chapter 10 of the report. The committee also believes that the review adds value to this report a as a standalone document, and is including it as an appendix.