. The World Conferences were established as global forums for discussion of ideas, policies and empirical findings related to the responsible conduct of research. The Conferences aim to galvanise the global effort to strengthen the trustworthiness and reliability of research and encourage researchers worldwide to be accountable for their findings. Earlier conferences were held in Lisbon (2007), Singapore (2010) and Montréal (2010). The Rio conference attracted over 470 delegates from 42 countries, including leaders of research institutions and funding agencies, policy makers, editors and publishers, legal experts, researchers and graduate students. The theme of the conference was Research Rewards and Integrity: Improving Systems to Promote Responsible Research. These Proceedings contain the abstracts of the presentations given at the 4th World Conference in concurrent sessions, partner symposia, and poster sessions. Also included are summaries of the discussions in three focus tracks, which allowed delegates to consider and work on questions about the roles of funders, institutions, and countries in improving research systems and strengthening research integrity. Videos of the plenary presentations are available at the conference website (www.wcri2015.org). The 5 th World Conference will be held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, May 28-31, 2017 (www.wcri2017.org). The University of Queensland (UQ) is one of the leading research-intensive universities in Australia. UQ first developed formal policy and procedure relating to responsible conduct of research in 2011. The ongoing practical application of the first iteration of these policies identified lack of clarity in procedure with challenges arising from unintended consequences. A significant case of research misconduct in 2013 was a catalyst to commission a comprehensive external review of policy, procedure and practice relevant to research integrity, ethics and compliance in line with the Australian Code for Responsible Conduct of Research (2007). This presentation will describe the comprehensive strategy arising from this review to improve our policies, our resources, our systems and to ensure the practice of responsible conduct of research sits at the heart of UQ. Additional funds have enabled us to increase the number and seniority of staff in the Research Integrity Office, to purchase a purpose built complaints management system and the Epigeum online Research Integrity training tool. With a team of experienced research leaders and other key staff we are revising our responsible research policies and developing an education and communication plan to ensure senior staff such as Executive Deans and Heads of Schools are confident in working collaboratively with the Research Integrity Office and that all staff understand their responsibilities under the Australian Code and university policy. We have appointed a team of 16 senior researchers to the roles of Research Integrity Advisors embedded within each Faculty and Institute as a first triage point for people wi...

The research paper begins by explaining the disciplinary surplus of a transformative approach to research, which aims at a minimalist intervention in the power relations of science. Methodologically, the paper combines self-positioning, auto-ethnographic notes, a critical analysis of power relations, semiotics, and critical discourse analysis. The main subject of its research, stigma and stigmatisation, is defined through the triad ‘freedom of expression – discrimination – protection against incitement to hatred’. The incitement to hatred, synonymous with hate speech, may be traced in stigmatisation, which serves as a tool of discrimination and exclusion. The starting-point of an argument urging the need for individual and collective responsibility for the lack of social bond (the lack which partly results from stigma as an element of hate speech) is a grasp of the role of political bipolarity. Another conceptualisation, important for the elaboration of this theme, is derived from classic liberal defence of freedom of expression, and thus of the human rights of women (John S. Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill). This defence is pitted against the ‘normal’, ‘mundane’. In Goffman’s reading of stigma, too, the ‘normal’ in socio-cultural life is perceived as destructive of human equality. In the field of modern scientific research, the opposite of the ‘normal’ is the stigma of conflict, that is, maladjustment. In some cases it is even actual or alleged political orientation that becomes a stigma, which points to the political marking of scientific hierarchies and to the formation of a sector margin. The paper concludes with a strategic option at the level of subjectivity: subjectivity may be processed by our adopting the stigma and by expressing the will to deconstruct the silence which permits an illegitimate exercise of power. In order to transform the mechanisms of scientific authorities, it is necessary to establish a functional instance for the enforcement of ethical science and research integrity.

No abstract

While reflecting on our lecturing practices, many of us feminists wish to deconstruct the ex-cathedra teaching position and its symbolic effects. After initial inquiry into feminist pedagogy, the present discussion combines basic information with the author’s teaching practice: underway in tertiary-level education and involving University of Ljubljana students. Some of the preconceived and some spontaneous, yet informed teaching approaches have been tested with positive results, and are worth sharing. They are accompanied by certain concepts, and their applied use which is presented on the list of teaching/learning topoi. Personal advancement in terms of more knowledgeable, skilled and emotionally fulfilling teaching and learning occurred in the first phase of the anti-Covid-19 regime and the virtual studying. The heavy working overload and new teaching and learning technological mode have pushed me towards the vivified and inventive “moderation” of Zoom and Google study meetings. The flexibility of the web lectures and seminars has promoted the invention of less conventional and coded communication, and the situational introduction of actual socio-political topics not inscribed in the curriculum. One of these outer topics was “gender relations in the anti-Covid-19 regime”. The search for novel teaching and learning practices has induced the need to systematise work practices. Reorganisation has been conceptual: the triangulation of students, the “object” (subject matter, related experience, and embodiment through feelings), the teacher. The quality of studying by way of the two way-transfer of knowledges and transferable skills has been proven while working together with students in research experiment at one of the subjects.

The paper discusses the epistemic change in understanding the ‘sex’/gender dichotomy and its deconstruction; conceptual developments have not been adequately implemented in the basic categorical gender apparatus and its usage promoted by the European Commission’s studies and the integrated linguistic tools. The basic terms, sex and gender, are used interchangeably; even definitions where new concepts are introduced contradict each other. Mainstream gender policies have been slow in integrating new knowledge, although there is a trend to introduce a new gender category into the administration framework of EU states. The study aims at constituting the epistemic platform and a renewed gender related categorical apparatus to be used in the education sector. It resolves the inconsistencies present in various gender-focused studies by introducing the lowest common linguistic denominators supported by practical usage, EU political trends, and the contemporary epistemology of knowledge.