Teaching and Assessing the Responsible Conduct of Research: A Delphi Consensus Panel Report

In an effort to foster research integrity, the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation mandate education of all trainees in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). Nevertheless, recent studies suggest that rates of questionable research practices and scientific misconduct are both high and considerably underreported. In part, this may be due to the fact that some ethical norms (e.g., authorship assignment) are far from clear and researchers are unsure how to respond to perceived misconduct. With funding from the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI), we convened four panels of experts to develop a consensus on the overarching goals and teaching content of RCR instruction. Our panelists recommended nine overarching objectives for RCR instruction that require us to rethink common modes of instruction, and they identified issues and standards that should be covered within controversial areas such as authorship assignment and whistle-blowing. Additionally, our experts recommended two new core areas for RCR instruction: The social responsibilities of scientists and current topics in RCR.     

The Challenge of Learning

This essay offers one attempt to apply insights from educational psychology to the teaching and learning of negotiation skills. First, we suggest a key reason why becoming an expert is challenging, namely, people's naïve theories about negotiation need to be challenged and largely put to rest. Second, we examine how professional schools typically teach negotiation. Third and finally, we offer suggestions for improving our negotiation pedagogy. To this end, we describe and review our research on analogical learning and how it can be used in classrooms to enhance learning.     

Red Dawn is Now: Race vs. Nation and the American Election

This article details the long-standing struggle within the American far right between those whose mission it is to resist the perceived subversion of international communism and its neo-Soviet successors now in power in the Kremlin and those whose mission is dedicated to preserving the White Race from the twin threats of miscegenation and marginalization from the corridors of power. Using the metaphor of the 1984 low-budget spectacular Red Dawn and noting the current pattern of Russian interference in the election and contacts with the Trump campaign, it traces the struggle from the ascendancy of anti-communism in the 1950s and 1960s to the current triumph of the race warriors and conspiracy theorists who championed the candidacy of Donald Trump. “Red Dawn Is Now” concludes with the observation that, for those who most fear foreign subversion, the revelations about Russian penwetration of the American election process and the Trump presidency represents a 21st-century version of the Soviet occupation that the young patriots of Red Dawn fame successfully repelled. If this is so, it suggests the possibility that Thomas Jefferson's observation that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants” may be prophetic and that the fifth wave of terrorism might at long last be at hand.     

Assessing the credibility of how climate adaptation aid projects are categorised

This article presents the findings of a re-evaluation of all 5,200 aid projects that OECD donors reported for 2012 as “climate change adaptation”-related, based on the “Rio marker” classification system. The findings confirm those from the academic and grey literature that the absence of independent quality control makes the adaptation Rio marker data almost entirely unreliable. This lack of credibility impedes meaningful assessments of progress toward the mainstreaming of adaptation in development cooperation activities. It also erodes trust in international climate negotiations, given that these data are frequently used in the financial reporting of developed countries to the UNFCCC.     

Communicating law,building peace: the pedagogy of public outreach from war crimes courts

ABSTRACT

There has been a growing interdisciplinary concern with the implications of public outreach processes from war crimes trials for new forms of citizenship in the wake of violent conflict. The enactment of such outreach, through seminars, civil society initiatives and workshops, provides a glimpse of the tensions between different conceptions of justice, belonging and rights in the post-conflict period. Specifically, such events constitute a rare public arena in the more fragmented and securitised domain of international legal practices. This paper focuses on a series of public workshops for survivors of wartime sexual violence carried out in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) 2011–13. Drawing on participant observations and open-ended interviews, we argue that such public outreach programmes can be viewed as a form of pedagogy, where the materials, format and arrangement of the events structure the nature of participation and engagement. In doing so we are making two contributions. First, the discussion advances understandings of public outreach as a form of pedagogy, illustrating how practices of dissent, rejection and resistance animate processes of public outreach. Second, the paper illuminates the role of pedagogy as a governmental instrument, reflecting the micro-situations within which individuals are interpellated into the state.