3rd MENA Educational Institute on Responsible...

3rd MENA Educational

Institute on Responsible

Science Reunion

June 11 - 12, 2016 Istanbul,

Turkey

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Reunion Overview………………………………………………

Page 1

Agenda…………………………………………………………

Page 3

Committee, Staff, Facilitators, Grantees List….…………….......

Page 7

Biographies………………………………………………………

Page 10

Assessment Tools

Baseline Knowledge (Institute Assessment)...………………

Page 14

Facilitator Daily Survey…………..…………………………

Page 18

Presentation Rubric…..………………………………….......

0

One-month Survey………………………………..…………

Page 21

Long Term Survey….………………………………………

Page 25

Reunion Overview

MENA III EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE REUNION

Ciragan Palace Kempinski Istanbul, Turkey Simal-C Room

June 11 – 12, 2016

REUNION OVERVIEW

On June 11-12, 2016, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences will hold a reunion meeting, as a follow-on effort

to the 3rd MENA Educational Institute on Responsible Science held in Istanbul, Turkey in May 2015. The

purpose of this reunion is to enable Institute grantees to provide their assessment and feedback and discuss with

Institute faculty and staff their experience of implementing activities in their home institutions using what was

taught at the 3rd MENA Educational Institute in 2015.

In order for the reunion to be most effective, and so that discussions can focus on the challenges and

opportunities that these projects presented, grantees will be grouped under five themes:

1) A Broad Approach to Responsible Conduct of Science

• Halima Ait Malek

• Hakan S. Orer

2) The Use of Active Learning in Teaching about Responsible Conduct of Science

• Leila Medraoui

• Mourat Daoudov

3) Mentoring

• Mohamed Azeqour

4) Authorship and Related Misconduct

• Mohammed A. Al Griw, Rafaa Ali Shkwa and Osama Hlal

• Younes Hmimsa

5) Plagiarism

• Hafsah Al-Anbari

• Ali Bourawi and Abdalgader Alsshagi

6) Laboratory Practice and Dual Use Issues in Research

• Hamid Toufik11

Each presenter/group will have 20 minutes to present his/her work, followed by 10 minutes of open Questions &

Answers. Each presentation should address the following questions:

1. What was your target group (age, background and number of participants)?

2. How was each of your objectives aligned with your activities and assessment?

3. What was the most successful aspect of your project?

4. What was the most challenging aspect of your project?

5. (For those who addressed multiple topics in their projects) How did you interrelate the topics of your

sessions?

6. How do you plan to sustain your work?

In addition to these broader questions, we would also like you to think about and discuss the following

questions, which you should adapt to your specific topic:

1) What did your target group already know or believe about {your topic}?

2) To what extent was their existing knowledge or experience of {your topic} "correct", i.e., consistent

with the information that you intended to teach, or incorrect?

3) How did you try to correct their misconceptions?

22

Agenda

REUNION MEETING AGENDA

Day 1: June 11 - Saturday

9:00 Welcome and Overview of the Reunion – Lida Anestidou

9:15 Project Presentations

Theme 1: A Broad Approach to Teaching on Responsible Conduct of Science

9:15 Impact of the Use of ICT on the Quality of Learning of Students and Professional Development of

Teachers - Halima Ait Malek

Currently, ICT plays an important role in improving the quality of teaching and learning at the university. They

can both enrich the educational content and stimulate interactions between learners and teachers in active

learning context. Appearing as a way to supplement traditional educational techniques, so they have enormous

benefits but also adverse effects related to electronic plagiarism as irresponsible behavior in both teaching and

research. This project focuses on the impact of ICT on the quality of learning of students and professional

development for teachers and will be conducted in two distinct approaches: An approach on the negative impact

of ICT on the conduct and responsible science and an approach on the positive impact of ICT on active learning

and capacity building and innovation in higher education.

9:45 Koc University Graduate Course on Responsible Science - Hakan S. Orer

The main goal of this project is to promote good research practice by implementing a graduate course on

responsible science with special emphasis on biosafety issues and research ethics based on active-learning

methodology and the core themes of the MENA Educational Institute on Responsible Science (the development

of professionalism in science, conducting research responsibly, and being part of the responsible scientific

community)

10:15 Coffee break

Theme 2: The Use of Active Learning in Teaching about Responsible Conduct of Science

10:30 Implementing Responsible Science by Active Learning – Leila Medraoui

This activity aims to help participants to: a) Increase their awareness and knowledge level of all aspects of

research misconduct (from laboratory to the scientific publication); b) Understand what is Responsible 33

Authorship in scientific publications; and c) Understand successful mentor‐mentee relationships, obligations and

rights. The presentation will focus on the use and challenges of Active Learning across the different topics

presented.

11:00 Implementing Responsible Science at Marmara University – Murat Daoudov

The team that has participated in the 3rd MENA Educational Institute on Responsible Science (RS) developed

and experimented with a teaching workshop in the Department of Istanbul and Global City Studies of Marmara

University, to initiate the university to the concepts of RS. This activity, based on the module practiced in

MENA III, will be the first step to prepare ground for potential future introduction of a full course on RS as part

of the curriculum.

Theme 3: Mentoring

11:30 Responsible Science on Authorship, Mentoring, Misconduct and dual use – Mohamed Azeqour

Through this workshop, participants will be exposed to topics pertaining to responsible science and will be able

to specifically understand the elements of responsible authorship and concepts of research misconduct.

Furthermore, they will know the tasks and responsibilities of mentors and trainees as well as issues pertaining to

dual use research. Although the workshop presented three topics, the presentation will focus primarily on issues

related to mentoring.

Theme 4: Authorship and Related Misconduct

12:00 Responsible Conduct of Science - Mohammed A. Al Griw, Rafaa A. Ali Shkwa, Osama Ahmed Hlal

The aim of this series of workshops is to build knowledge across all entities involved in responsible conduct of

science so that participants may understand the importance and fundamental responsibilities of scientists to

conduct and communicate their research with honesty, integrity and respect. Although the series presented a

variety of topics across different faculties of a number of institutions, the group’s presentation will focus

primarily on authorship and publication responsibilities and related misconduct.

12:30 Responsible Science: Aspects of Authorship and Misconduct – Younis Hmimsa

The goals of this workshop were to help participants improve understanding and awareness of authorship (based

on the ICMJE recommendations) for authenticity and excellence in publications and understand research

misconduct.

13:00 Lunch

44

Theme 5: Plagiarism

14:30 Responsible Conduct of Science: Plagiarism - Hafsa Suhail Najim Al-anbari

As part of a series of topics on responsible science, this 2-day workshop focused on plagiarism aiming to

familiarize the audience with types of plagiarism; paraphrasing and citing references; the negative consequences

of practicing plagiarism and the common rules against acts of plagiarism.

15:00 Introduction of Responsible Science Aspects – Ali Bourawi and Abdalgader Alsshagi

Why is responsible science a concern? Because of the advancement of scientific knowledge, and the complicity

of the relations between science and society it became important that researchers and scientists need to be able

to take their scientific decisions and responsibility based on solid legal, ethical and in-depth understanding of

their subject, and its vital implications on the modern advanced science and society. Therefore, this module was

designed to teach the concept of responsible science to postgraduate students especially those in colleges dealing

with medical and life sciences. Although the module presented a variety of topics, the group’s presentation will

focus primarily on plagiarism.

Theme 6: Laboratory Safety and Dual Use Research

15:30 Responsible Science: Chemical Laboratory Safety and Dual Use of Chemicals – Hamid Toufik

Easy access to dual-use chemicals and available information on techniques and processes used to produce

chemical weapons are potentially an instrument of choice for terrorists. Hence the need and importance of

training and sensitization of teachers-researchers, laboratory technicians and doctoral students on the

management of chemicals and chemical risks: identify and know the hazards in order to control risks. This

workshop was conceived to familiarize participants with hazards associated with chemicals in the laboratory,

with the problems stemming from chemicals’ dual use and the need to preserve the health and well-being of

staff.

16:00 Coffee break and open discussion about challenges to implementing Responsible Science in each country.

17:15 Adjourn

55

Day 2: June 12 - Sunday

9:00 Reflection on the presentations and topics of Day 1 – Elizabeth Heitman

9:30 Revisiting Assessments – Alastair Hay and Lida Anestidou

The committee will share data from the assessments conducted and analyzed for a number of the Educational

Institutes of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

Afterwards, participants will engage in an exercise to deepen their understanding of a) how to create a matrix of

possible answers to assessment questions and b) how to score answers to the assessment questions using the

matrix. The exercise will utilize the “think-pair-share” technique. Afterwards the entire group will discuss the

challenges they encountered in scoring the sample assessment and strategies to ensure that assessments are fully

integrated into any new activities in the future.

Lastly, participants divided into working groups will discuss their experience with assessing their own work

around the following questions:

• How do you use information on how people learn in your own classrooms?

• How might this knowledge change your teaching, if it hasn’t already?

• How do you test that your students really understand a topic?

11:00 Preparing for the next steps – Alastair Hay and Elizabeth Heitman

An open discussion about what may come next in participants’ institutions, in their country or in collaborative

efforts.

12:00 Adjourn

66

Committee, Staff, Facilitators, Grantees List



June 11 – 12, 2016

Committee Members

Alastair Hay Professor of Environmental Toxicology LIGHT Laboratories University of Leeds, United Kingdom [email protected]

Elizabeth Heitman Associate Professor Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society Vanderbilt University Medical Center Nashville, TN United States [email protected]

Facilitators

Fatima Lamchouri Professor, Polydisciplinary Faculty of Taza Université Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah-Fès Fes, Morocco [email protected]

Laila Sbabou Assistant Professor Faculty of Science University of Mohammed V-Agdal Rabat, Morocco [email protected]

Grantees IRAQ Hafsa Suhail Najim Al-Anbari Clinical Pharmacy Lecturer Pharmacy Department Esraa University College Baghdad [email protected]

777

LIBYA

Mohammed A. Al-Griw Lecturer Zoology Department Tripoli University Tripoli [email protected]

Abdalgader Saleh Ali Alsshagi University Staff Member/Professor Department of Biochemistry Sebha University Sebha [email protected]

Ali Bourawi Member National Committee for Biosafety and Bioethics Tripoli [email protected]

Osama Ahmed Hlal Associate Professor Geology Department Tripoli University Tripoli [email protected]

Rafaa A. Ali Shkwa Lecturer Botany Department Tripoli University Tripoli [email protected]

MOROCCO

Halima Aitmalek Associate Professor Faculty of Safi Cadi Ayyad University Marrakech [email protected]

Mohamed Azeqour Professor Faculty of Sciences and Technology of Mohammedia (FSTM) University of Casablanca Casablanca [email protected]

Younes Hmimsa Assistant Professor Faculty of Larache Université Abdelmalek Essaadi Larache [email protected]

Leila Medraoui Professor Department of Biology University of Mohammed V-Agdal Rabat [email protected]

Hamid Toufik Associate Professor Polydisciplinary Faculty of Taza Université Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah-Fès Fes [email protected]

888

TURKEY

Murat Daoudov Lecturer Department of Public Administration University of Marmara Istanbul [email protected]

Hakan Sedat Orer Professor School of Medicine Koc University Istanbul [email protected]

US National Academy of Sciences Staff

Lida Anestidou Senior Program Officer Institute for Laboratory Animal Research The National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine Washington, DC United States [email protected]

Vanessa Lester Research Associate Division of Earth and Life Studies The National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine Washington, DC United States [email protected]

999

Biographies



June 11 – 12, 2016

Committee Members

Alastair Hay is Professor of Environmental Toxicology in the School of Medicine at the University of Leeds, UK. Professor Hay holds a BSc in Chemistry and PhD in Biochemistry, both from the University of London. As a toxicologist his major interests are on the effects of chemicals on health but his research work also covers work on calcium metabolism, kidney damage, drugs of abuse, pharmacokinetics and proteomics. Professor Hay currently teaches basic biology, research methodology, and ethics to medical students in years 1 to 3 of their 5-year medical degree. External to the university Professor Hay has been an adviser to the UK government for over 20 years on both the regulation of chemicals and exposure standards in the workplace; he also advises the European Union on workplace exposure limits. Professor Hay has had an over 35-year involvement with chemical weapons’ issues and advises the UK government on matters relating to the implementation of the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention. Professor Hay has developed teaching materials for chemists on such topics as multiple uses of chemicals; chemical weapons; and codes-of-conduct. He has worked with numerous national and international organizations to promote these issues in both the chemical and biological sciences and to help find innovative teaching approaches to engage young scientists and promote responsible conduct in research.

Elizabeth Heitman is Associate Professor of Medical Ethics in the Departments of Medicine and Anesthesiology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC). She is a member of the Vanderbilt School of Medicine's Academy for Excellence in Teaching. Dr. Heitman's work focuses on cultural and international aspects of medicine, biomedical science, and public health. She teaches research ethics and scientific integrity in Vanderbilt's Master of Science in Clinical Investigation program and ethics in global health for the Master of Public Health program. Dr. Heitman's primary research addresses evaluation of research integrity education and trainees' professional socialization and cultural awareness. She is co-director of a 5-year research ethics education program with the Universidade Eduardo Mondlane in Maputo, Mozambique, Research Ethics Education Initiative, both sponsored by the NIH Fogarty International Center. In addition to her international work with the National Academy of Sciences’ Educational Institutes on Responsible Research, she is a member of the Science Ethics Initiative with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and China Association for Science and Technology (CAST). Dr. Heitman received her PhD (1988) from the joint program in biomedical ethics at Rice University and the University of Texas - Houston Medical School.

101010

Facilitators

Fatima Lamchouri is a Professor at the Polydisciplinary Faculty of Taza, Université Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah-Fès. She received her PhD in Biology with a specialty in Physiology and Pharmacology from the Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Rabat, Morocco in January 2000. Her research interests include medicinal plants, phytochemistry, experimental oncology and molecular modeling. She is a member of the Executive Bureau of the Moroccan Biological Safety Association (AMBS) and the Vice President of the Moroccan Society of Medicinal Chemistry’s division at her home university. Laila Sbabou is a Research Assistant and Professor of Genomics and Biotechnology at Mohamed V University, Faculty of Science, in Morocco. She received a PhD in Genomics and Biotechnology in 2009 from Mohamed V University, where she is currently teaching Bioinformatics, Molecular Biology and Genetic Engineering. Her PhD research was focused on studying the root development and genetic response of Lupinus albus to phosphorus stress. She obtained a Doctoral Fulbright Scholarship and spent two years (2006-2007) at the University of Minnesota in USA, where she gained expertise in plant genomics and bioinformatics. She is now conducting research on bioremediation. She is interested in deciphering the molecular mechanisms involved in the response of plants and associated microorganisms to heavy metal stress.

Grantees

IRAQ Hafsa Suhail Najim Al-anbari is a clinical pharmacy lecturer in the Pharmacy Department of Esraa University College. She holds a PhD in pharmacy from the University Sains Malysia (USM). Before joining Esraa University College, Dr. Al-anbari worked as a research associate and assistant instructor for the department of Clinical Pharmacy, USM. In, 2009, she worked as a lecturer in the Pharmacy Department of Island College of Technology, a USM franchised program where she won the best lecturer award. Her work has been published in a number of international journals. LIBYA Mohammed Al. Griw is a lecturer in the Zoology Department at Tripoli University. He holds a PhD in molecular neuroscience from University of Leeds. His fields of research are in structural, cell and molecular biology, biological systems and organisms, and medical and health sciences. Abdulgader S. Ali Alsshagi is a university staff member and professor in the Department of Biochemistry at Sebha University. He holds a PhD in medical biochemistry from the University of Sheffield, UK. He teaches medical biochemistry to undergraduate medical and dental students. Ali Bourawi is a member of the Libyan National Committee for Biosafety and Bioethics. He holds a Master’s degree in bioethics from the University of Toronto. He has worked as a family physician since 2002. He also works as a health educator around stigmas and discrimination against people living with HIV/AIDS. Osama Ahmed Hlal is an associate professor in the Geology Department at Tripoli University. He holds a PhD in geology from Uppsala University. His philosophy of teaching is to create an environment that allows for supervised exploration. He believes that the most significant learning occurs in situations that are both meaningful and realistic. The overriding goal of his teaching has been to place learners in situation where students work in groups in lecture rooms. He has taught courses in information evaluation, petrophysics, subsurface geology, petroleum geology and geophysics, stratigraphy and introduction to geology. This includes undergraduate and advanced postgraduate levels.

111111

Raffaa Shkwa is a lecturer in the Botany Department at Tripoli University. He holds a PhD in molecular taxonomy from Reading University, UK. He aims to be an enthusiastic adaptive and fast-learning person with a broad and acute interest in plant taxonomy and systematics. He particularly enjoys teaching students in the lab and collecting plants from the field. He also enjoys collaborating with scientists from different countries and disciplines. MOROCCO Halima Aitmalek is an associate professor with the Faculty of Safi at Cadi Ayyad University of Marrakech. She holds a PhD in geosciences, raw materials and the environment from National Polytechnic Institute of Lorraine, France. She served as an associate professor at the Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdallah University of Fez in 2003 and then moved her research and teaching to the Polydisciplinary Faculty of Taza before joining the Cadi Ayyad University of Marrakech in 2010. Her research work is the result of many collaborations within the research team "geomorphology, environment and management of the Coast." She holds many responsibilities at the university including modules responsibilities, monitoring and coordination of practical work, field trips, end of study projects and within the governing board. Mohamed Azequor is a professor with the Faculty of Sciences and Technology of Mohammedia at University of Casablanca. He holds a PhD in plant biotechnology from Mohammed V University. His PhD study was concerning interspecific hybridization (T. durum x T. aestivum) via in vitro culture techniques, androgenesis and immature embryos rescue. His PhD research also concerned the unconformity genetic of date palm clones obtained by organogenesis technique through phenotypic traits and molecular markers. Younes Hmimsa is an assistant professor with the Faculty of Larache at the Université Abdelmalek Essaadi. He holds a PhD in natural sciences from the Abdelmalek Essaâdi University. As part of his PhD, his research focused on the study of agro diversity, which one seeks to characterize the traditional agro ecosystems mountain through the evaluation of the state of agro diversity and the identification of the factors that will influence whatsoever, directly or indirectly. In the Faculty of Larache, he teaches different modules of biology and supervises students in traineeships for graduates. Leila Medraoui is a professor in the Department of Biology at the University of Mohammed V-Agdal. She holds a PhD in biotechnology from Mohammed V University, Rabat. She studied the molecular characterization of Moroccan sorghum. She gives lectures, tutorials and practical courses in molecular biology, genetic engineering, plant-microbe interactions, molecular phylogeny, genome analysis and bioinformatics. Hamid Toufik is an associate professor with the Polydisciplinary Faculty of Taza at Ben Abdellah University of Fez. He holds a PhD in chemistry from Science Faculty of Meknes – Moulay Ismail University Morocco. His research focused on the valorization of natural inorganic substances by using them in the development of new formulations of non-toxic ceramic glazes and removal of heavy metals from waste of the ceramic industry. He teaches several modules primarily in chemistry. He also coordinated a young and dynamic team within the “Material Sciences Chemistry sector”: Professional License in Process and Physical-Chemical Analyses for ten years. He was a member of the Faculty Council and a committee member of the 2005-2008 budgets. Since December 2012, he has served as the head of the Biology - Chemistry - Geology Department, including three scientific sectors: Life Sciences, Material Sciences Chemistry and Science Studies of the Earth and the Universe. He is a member of the Faculty Council and Scientific Committee. He is also responsible for the “Molecules, Materials, Interfaces & Modeling” research team and a member of the Materials, Natural Substances, Environment and Modeling Laboratory.

121212

TURKEY Murat Daoudov is a lecturer in the Department of Public Administration at University of Marmara. He holds a Master’s degree in local government from the University of Marmara. He has experience in public administration and international organizations in the fields of local government, decentralization, public policy, immigration, and alternative diplomacy, covering Europe, Turkey and the Arab world. In his work, he focuses on linking research and lectures with the practice. After working as a consultant (including in Iraq with USAID-funded projects) he launched his own consulting company (Middle East Development Network or MDN / mdncorp.com) that aims at linking science with practice, universities and students with governments and companies, in the field of public policy. Hakan Sedat Orer is a professor in the School of Medicine at Koc University. He holds a PhD in pharmacology from Hacettepe University, Turkey. He spent two years as a post-doctoral research fellow at Michigan State University from 1993-1995. From 2003 to 2012, he served as the director (dean) of the graduate studies in health sciences program at Hacettepe University. During his time as director, he took on several initiatives to establish policies on responsible research and published guidelines on ethical conduct, clinical trials and thesis studies. He and his colleagues also prepared a guide to good mentoring with special emphasis on being a role model in ethical conduct. Currently, he is the chairman of Koç University Ethics Committees, a member of the National Ethics Committee for Animal Experiments and the UNESCO National Commission Expert Committee for Bioethics.

U.S. National Academy of Sciences Staff

Lida Anestidou is Senior Program Officer at the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and Director of the OIE Collaborating Center for Laboratory Animal Welfare and Science. Before joining the Academies she was a faculty member of the Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Dr. Anestidou holds a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) degree from Aristotle University in Greece (her home country), a Masters in Veterinary Sciences from the University of Florida, and a doctorate in Physiology working with Norman Weisbrodt at the University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston. Dr. Anestidou is responsible for policy matters pertaining to the care and use of laboratory animals as well as a portfolio of international programs on responsible science, research with dual use potential, and education with academic partners from the Middle East, North Africa, South and Southeast Asia. Dr. Anestidou serves as an Independent Expert in the Ethics Evaluation of grant applications to the 7th Framework Program and Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program of the European Research Council and the European Commission. She is a member of the National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists, a joint committee of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Bar Association. Vanessa Lester, M.A., is a research associate at the National Academy of Sciences in the Division of Earth and Life Studies. She has worked in research and project management for over five years in areas of education, life sciences, and environmental policy. She received her Masters of Arts in Environmental Resource Policy from George Washington University in 2013.

131313

Assessment Tools

Baseline Knowledge Institute Assessment

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE ON RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE

INSTITUTE ASSESSMENT In order for Committee members to know more about the group’s understanding of the Institute’s topics, please fill out this anonymous questionnaire on subjects related to Responsible Conduct of Research and Pedagogy. Respondents’ answers will be evaluated as a group. Please do not write your name or other identifying information on this questionnaire so that it remains confidential. Thank you for your time and effort!

1. Identify two (2) examples of actions that you consider to be irresponsible research practices.

°

°

2. Describe one (1) way in which research misconduct can be prevented or reduced

° In the laboratory:

° Across the university

° Across the country

3. You are a research professor in a large academic department. Your chair is a leader in a field that is related to yours, but not the same. Your chair provides material for your research that you need to complete your project. As you prepare a manuscript from the study, your chair stops you in the hallway and asks to be listed as an author. How would you respond to this request?

14

4. A graduate student writes up her thesis work. She does an excellent job and requires little input from her mentor, the Principal Investigator of the larger project. After presenting her thesis to her examining committee, the student learns that her mentor has used a large section of her thesis verbatim as part of an application for funding of a project after she is gone. Do you think that a research mentor can automatically use the writing of his or her students? Why? How should the graduate student respond to her mentor’s use of her work?

5. Two collaborating investigators have co-authored two papers based on a series of experiments on the same topic. They decide to use the same introductory figure in both papers. They also previously used this figure in a monograph. What is the best way for them to proceed?

A. Change the font, the thickness of the lines, and the orientation of the figure in one paper.

B. Notify the publisher of the monograph and get permission to use the figure in the other papers.

C. Use the identical figure in both papers – they are the original authors and do not need permission to reuse it.

D. Repeat the experiment for each paper.

15

PLEASE CIRCLE THE MOST APPROPRIATE ANSWER

Re-using exact text from your own prior publication without citation is plagiarism.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree The primary function of the instructor is to ensure that the student has been exposed to the correct factual scientific models and theories.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree

An author can be anyone who has contributed to the success of the project, i.e., anyone without whom the project would never have been completed for publication.


Active learning is most often observed in a laboratory setting.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree During class, the faculty member should do most of the talking.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree The most effective way to teach is to have students work frequently in groups.


My classroom is a lecture hall and therefore I cannot do active learning.


Mentoring is an innate skill that cannot be learned or taught; some people are good at it while others are not.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree In class, students should spend half or more of their time solving problems.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree When teaching information, an instructor assesses learning. This assessment is done only to assign a grade, or to pass or fail the learner.


16

Assessment should be done periodically during the teaching session.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree An instructor should provide opportunities for learners to assess their understanding during the learning process.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree There is an important association between active learning and a learner’s misconceptions.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree Active learning occurs when the learners are engaged in their own learning by doing something other than just passively listening to the instructor and taking notes.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree Active learning should completely replace lectures.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree Most students come into my class without prior conceptual knowledge about fundamental concepts of science.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree The most important thing to do in lecture is cover the content.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree My class is too large and therefore I cannot do active learning.


17

Facilitator Daily Survey

Daily Survey for Facilitators This survey is designed to gather information about how groups at the Educational Institute work together. The information we acquire will help us to determine how group composition and the structure of the Educational Institute impact group work so that we may improve this in future institutes. While every facilitator would like to have a functional group, it is not always the case and is in no way a reflection upon the facilitator. Through your candid assessment we can learn how to improve group work. Institute: ________________________________________ Group: __________________________________________ Day (1, 2 etc…) of group work: _________ Please fill in the numbers of each type of participant for your group:

Demonstrator Lecturer Instructor Assistant Professor

Associate Professor Professor Academic Administrator Other (Please specify):

What activities was your group engaged in today (circle ALL that apply) . . . getting to know one another

selection of group’s topic developing assessments of module’s content

selection of active learning techniques for module

sharing module with another group responding to feedback from group share session

working on presentation practicing presentation giving presentation

Please respond to the following statements about your group’s work for today only (circle one). Note, some may not be applicable and you can leave those blank and respond to those questions when they do apply: 1. The group has accomplished the stated tasks for today.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 2. The team is working well with one another.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 3. The group is disrupted by one or more dominators.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 4. The group is dominated by a senior member.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 5. The imbalances in the group are related to gender.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree

18

6. The group has one or more withdrawers.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 7. The group is using backward design to develop their module.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 8. The imbalances in the group are due to professional differences (example, M.D. vs Ph.D.).

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 9. There are conflicts in the group due to participants coming from different universities.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree 10. Members of the group intend to participate equally in the final presentation.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree In the space below, briefly provide any comments about your group’s progress or function. Does your group need anything to help them accomplish their goals (resources etc…)? At this point, does your group need anything for their presentation (clickers, props etc…)? Other comments:

19

Presentation Rubric

RUBRIC FOR EVALUATING FINAL PRESENTATIONS Group: ______________________________________________

Objectives To Be Evaluated

Exemplary All

elements are present

(3)

Very Good One or more

elements missing

(2)

Fair Several

elements missing

(1)

Not present Lacking most

or all elements

(0) Responsible Conduct of Science

Presenters demonstrated their understanding of their RCS content area well (answered questions well) Used relevant example of their topic (ex: real Dual Use topic and not Biosafety) Cited/acknowledged appropriate resources that were used

Comments:

Pedagogy Presenters used multiple active learning techniques Presenters used each active learning technique correctly (ex: good clicker questions) Presenters fully engaged participants (giving them space and time)

Comments:

Backward Design

Presenters showed objectives Presenters showed a real assessment plan The activities used in the presentation were aligned with the assessments and objectives

Comments:

Presentation Qualities

Presenters showed where their teaching module fits into a larger framework/context Had appropriate transitions between slides Looked at audience while speaking Used figures appropriately (if present, they referred to them) Didn’t have too many words and the font was large enough to read easily Spoke loudly and clearly enough for audience to hear Responded appropriately to critiques and comments (wasn’t too defensive)

Comments:

20

One-Month Survey

As a participant in a recent Educational Institute, your reflections on the quality of discussions during the Institute and the implications of these discussions for research, policy, and education practice are important. We are inviting you to provide feedback to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences about the Institute itself. We also would like to know how you are planning to use what you learned at the Institute in your own academic/research setting and in collaboration with other participants from your institute and across your country. While your response will remain confidential, your views will be combined with those of your Institute colleagues to guide us in improving future programs on education about responsible conduct of science. This survey should take approximately 15-20 minutes to complete. Thank you for your participation. Lida Anestidou, on behalf of the organizing committee of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences 1. Which ONE of the following best describes your position in your home institution?

Demonstrator Lecturer Instructor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Academic Administrator1 Other (Please specify):

2. If you currently teach students, please indicate the levels of students with whom you work (check all that apply): Undergraduate students Graduate students Postdoctoral students Medical or other professional students Other (Please specify):

3. Please indicate which THREE reasons best describe why you chose to attend this Institute:

To meet colleagues from my institution who share interests in responsible conduct of science To meet colleagues from my country who share interests in responsible conduct of science To reconnect with colleagues who share my interest in responsible conduct of science ___To deepen my understanding of the issues related to the responsible conduct of science To discover tools, resources and best practices for incorporating evidence-based teaching techniques into

my courses To become more involved with future efforts to improve education about the responsible conduct of

science in my country To become more involved with future efforts to improve education about the responsible conduct of

science internationally

1 “Academic Administrator refers to a participant who serves primarily as a leader of university programs such as a Dean or Associate Dean or a Department Chair whose primary responsibilities are in areas other than research or teaching.

21

Other (please specify):

4. This Institute was designed to bring people together from the many educational institutions in Egypt to hopefully launch a series of future activities to promote education about the responsible conduct of science (RCS). Based on discussions at the Institute and recommendations generated by participants, please describe what next steps you consider as the most important priorities for maintaining momentum and moving forward to infuse education on RCS into courses and other educational programs at your institution? 5. How are you planning to move forward on the issues addressed at the Institute? Please describe specific plans

you have developed. 6. How well did the Institute meet your expectations?

4

(Exceeded My Expectations)

3 (Met All of My Expectations)

2 (Met Some of My

Expectations)

1 (Did Not Meet My

Expectations) 7. Please explain what aspects you found particularly effective OR ineffective about the Institute: Effective aspects

Ineffective aspects

8. Please rate the Institute on: 5 (Excellent) 4

(Very Good) 3

(Good) 2

(Fair) 1

(Poor ) Value of the Institute as a learning or professional development

22

experience. Clarity of Institute’s goals and objectives.

Relevance of topics that were presented in relation to the stated goals of the Institute.

Quality of sessions about responsible conduct of science.

Quality of sessions about the scientific basis for the use of active learning techniques.

Value and relevance of assessments of learning (both formative and summative) used throughout the Institute.

Relevance to you and your work on the issues presented.

5 (Excellent) 4

(Very Good)

3 (Good)

2 (Fair)

1 (Poor )

Usefulness of resources provided by the organizers and presenters (e.g., background resources in Dropbox and the briefing book).

Inclusion of information and perspectives from a diverse range of views.

Balance of time spent in whole group and team breakout sessions.

Amount of time devoted to discussions during plenary sessions.

Time to meet and interact with other participants.

Helpfulness of your breakout group’s facilitators.

Helpfulness of the National Academies staff.

Hotel accommodations and meals.

11. Is active learning being used with other topics than RCS at your institution? If so, please list the topics and provide the approximate date when these courses were initiated.

23

12. Please offer suggestions about additional topics to incorporate or topics to delete in future National Academy of Sciences activities related to education about the responsible conduct of science. 13. In the space below, please feel free to offer any additional comments, suggestions, or reflections about your experience at the Institute. Your name and date (optional)

24

Long Term Survey

Educational Institute on Responsible Science Long-Term Survey

You have been a valuable participant in an Educational Institute on Responsible Science sponsored by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and we would like to hear how you have used the information from the Institute and whether you have kept in contact with other participants from your country or elsewhere. This survey should take approximately 15 minutes to complete. Thank you for your participation. Lida Anestidou, On behalf of the organizing committee of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences For the area of networking, please let us know . . . . . . whether you have still been in contact with other people from the Institute you attended. . . . whether you have worked with others at your home institution on Responsible Conduct of Science or pedagogy. For the area of Responsible Conduct of Science, please let us know about . . . . . . activities you have participated in. . . . resources you have found.

25

. . . institutional support you may have obtained for dissemination. . . . websites you have constructed (please provide a URL). . . . conferences you have attend or been invited to. . . . publications, sabbaticals or other professional development opportunities you have engaged in (include plans you may

have and please send us your publications if any). For the area of pedagogy, please let us know about . . . . . . what types of active learning techniques have you used in your classroom. . . . resources you have found.

26

. . . institutional support you may have obtained for dissemination. . . . websites you have constructed (please provide a URL). . . . conferences you have attend or been invited to. . . . publications, sabbaticals or other professional development opportunities you have engaged in (include plans you may

have and please send us your publications if any).

27

3rd MENA Educational Institute on Responsible...

Documents

Transcript of 3rd MENA Educational Institute on Responsible...