Recommendations for Effective Integration of Ethics and Responsible Conduct of Research (E/RCR) Education into Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences: A Meeting Report

Abstract

Advancement of the scientific enterprise relies on individuals conducting research in an ethical and responsible manner. Educating emergent scholars in the principles of ethics/responsible conduct of research (E/RCR) is therefore critical to ensuring such advancement. The recent impetus to include authentic research opportunities as part of the undergraduate curriculum, via course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), has been shown to increase cognitive and noncognitive student outcomes. Because of these important benefits, CUREs are becoming more common and often constitute the first research experience for many students. However, despite the importance of E/RCR in the research process, we know of few efforts to incorporate E/RCR education into CUREs. The Ethics Network for Course-based Opportunities in Undergraduate Research (ENCOUR) was created to address this concern and promote the integration of E/RCR within CUREs in the biological sciences and related disciplines. During the inaugural ENCOUR meeting, a four-pronged approach was used to develop guidelines for the effective integration of E/RCR in CUREs. This approach included: 1) defining appropriate student learning objectives; 2) identifying relevant curriculum; 3) identifying relevant assessments; and 4) defining key aspects of professional development for CURE facilitators. Meeting outcomes, including the aforementioned E/RCR guidelines, are described herein.

BioSkills Guide: Development and National Validation of a Tool for Interpreting theVision and ChangeCore Competencies

“…BioSkills Guide responsible conduct of research (Diaz-Martinez et al, 2019), quantitative reasoning (Durán and Marshall, 2018;Stanhope et al, 2017), bioinformatics (Wilson Sayres et al, 2018), data science (Kjelvik and Schultheis, 2019), data communication (Angra and Gardner, 2016), modeling (Quillin and Thomas, 2015;Diaz Eaton et al, 2019), the interdisciplinary nature of science (Tripp and Shortlidge, 2019), and scientific writing (Timmerman et al, 2011). Efforts to define general or STEMwide educational goals for college graduates can also inform how we teach competencies in biology, such as the Association of American College and University VALUE rubrics (Rhodes, 2010) and more targeted work on information literacy (Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015), communication (Mercer-Mapstone and Kuchel, 2017), and process skills (Understanding Science, 2016;Cole et al, 2018).…”

“…Scaffolding competencies across course series or whole programs will require thoughtful reflection on the component parts of each learning outcome and how students develop these outcomes over time. To assist in this work, there are a number of resources focusing on particular competencies (e.g., see Quillin and Thomas, 2015;Angra and Gardner, 2016;Pelaez et al, 2017;Wilson Sayres et al, 2018;Diaz Eaton et al, 2019;Diaz-Martinez et al, 2019;Tripp and Shortlidge, 2019), all of which describe specific competencies in further detail than is contained in the BioSkills Guide. Additionally, work developing learning progressions in K-12 education, and more recently higher education, could guide future investigations of competency scaffolding (Schwarz et al, 2009;Scott et al, 2019).…”

Using IRB Protocols to Teach Ethical Principles for Research and Everyday Life

“…More instructors have been turning to these hands-on experiences, including writing and defending IRB-like protocols, when teaching research ethics (e.g., Danowitz, Brown, Jones, Diegelman-Parente, & Taylor, 2016;Diaz-Martinez, et al, 2019;Kallgren & Tabuer, 1996;Olimpo, Diaz-Martinez, Bhatt, & D'Arcy, 2017;Olszewski, 2019;Segarra & Gomez, 2014). The few existing studies on the benefits of using IRB-like procedures have shown that students reported an appreciation for ethical issues (Kallgren & Tabuer, 1996) and were more likely to address issues of informed consent and risks to participants in study design (Segarra & Gomez, 2014).…”

BioSkills Guide: Development and National Validation of a Tool for Interpreting the Vision and Change Core Competencies

“…Scaffolding competencies across course series or whole programs will require thoughtful reflection on the component parts of each learning outcome and how students develop these outcomes over time. To assist in this work, there are a number of resources focusing on particular competencies (for example, see Angra & Gardner, 2016;Diaz-Martinez et al, 2019;Diaz Eaton et al, 2019;Pelaez et al, 2017;Quillin & Thomas, 2015;Tripp & Shortlidge, 2019;Wilson Sayres et al, 2018), all of which describe specific competencies in further detail than is contained in the BioSkills Guide. Additionally, work in K-12 education, and more recently higher education, developing learning progressions could guide future investigations of competency scaffolding (Schwarz et al, 2009;Scott, Wenderoth, & Doherty, 2019).…”

“…Since then, two groups have unpacked the core concepts into more detailed frameworks Cary & Branchaw, 2017). For competencies, biology education researchers have enumerated a variety of specific scientific practices, including: science process skills (Coil, Wenderoth, Cunningham, & Dirks, 2010), experimentation (Pelaez et al, 2017), scientific literacy (Gormally, Brickman, & Lutz, 2012), responsible conduct of research (Diaz-Martinez et al, 2019), quantitative reasoning (Durán & Marshall, 2018;Stanhope et al, 2017), bioinformatics (Wilson Sayres et al, 2018), data science (Kjelvik & Schultheis, 2019), data communication (Angra & Gardner, 2016), modeling (Diaz Eaton et al, 2019;Quillin & Thomas, 2015), the interdisciplinary nature of science (Tripp & Shortlidge, 2019), and scientific writing (Timmerman, Strickland, Johnson, & Payne, 2011). Efforts to define general or STEM-wide education goals for college graduates can also inform how we teach competencies in biology, such as the Association of American College & University VALUE rubrics (Rhodes, 2010) and more targeted work on information literacy (Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015), communication (Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2017), and process skills (Cole, Lantz, Ruder, Reynders, & Stanford, 2018;Understanding Science, 2016).…”