Developing Capacities For Teaching Science in MENA Region

Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region: Refashioning Scientific Dialogue
Developing Capacities for Teaching

Responsible Science in the MENA Region:
Refashioning Scientific Dialogue
In cooperation with
Bibliotheca Alexandrina
and
The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS)

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.


Committee on Developing a Framework for an International Faculty Development Project on

Education About Research in the Life Sciences with Dual Use Potential
Board on Life Sciences

Division on Earth and Life Studies
In cooperation with
Bibliotheca Alexandrina
and
The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS)
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the
National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of
Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the
committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for
appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Grant No. S-LMAQM-10-GR-087 between the National Academy of
Sciences and the U.S. Department of State. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations
expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-28639-8

International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-28639-5
Additional copies of this report are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street
NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; www.nap.edu/.
Copyright 2013 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of

distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the
furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority
of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to
advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is
president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National
Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its
administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of
Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of
Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages
education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M.
Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure
the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters
pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the
National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal
government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and
education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to
associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of
furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with
general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in
providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities.
The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J.
Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research
Council.
www.national-academies.org


COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR AN INTERNATIONAL FACULTY

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON EDUCATION ABOUT RESEARCH IN THE LIFE SCIENCES
WITH DUAL USE POTENTIAL
RITA R. COLWELL (Chair), Distinguished University Professor, University of Maryland & Johns
Hopkins University; Honorary Chairperson and Senior Advisor, Canon U.S. Life Sciences, Inc.
ENRIQUETA C. BOND, President Emeritus, Burroughs Wellcome Fund
JOHN D. CLEMENTS, Professor and Chair, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, School of
Medicine; Director, Center for Infectious Diseases, Tulane University
NANCY D. CONNELL, Professor of Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
(UMDNJ); Director, UMDNJ Center for Biodefense
CLARISSA DIRKS, Associate Professor of Biology, The Evergreen State College
MOHAMED El-FAHAM, Director, Center for Special Studies and Programs (CSSP), Bibliotheca
Alexandrina, Egypt
ALASTAIR W.M. HAY, Professor of Environmental Toxicology and Epidemiology, University of Leeds,
United Kingdom
ELIZABETH HEITMAN, Associate Professor of Medical Ethics, Center for Biomedical Ethics,
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
ADEL A.F. MAHMOUD, Professor, Woodrow Wilson School, Department of Molecular Biology,
Princeton University
MONA MOSTAFA MOHAMED, Professor of Cell Biology, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science,
Cairo University, Egypt
JAMES H. STITH, Vice President Emeritus, Physics Resources Center, American Institute of Physics
STAFF
LIDA ANESTIDOU, Study Director and Senior Program Officer, Institute for Laboratory Animal
Research
JO L. HUSBANDS, Scholar and Senior Project Director, Board on Life Sciences
JAY B. LABOV, Senior Scientist, Board on Life Sciences
SAYYEDA AYESHA AHMED, Senior Program Assistant
CARL-GUSTAV ANDERSON, Program Associate, Board on Life Sciences
FRANCES E. SHARPLES, Director, Board on Life Sciences; Acting Director, Institute for Laboratory
Animal Research

BOARD ON LIFE SCIENCES
JO HANDELSMAN (Chair), Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

VICKI L. CHANDLER, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Palo Alto, California
SEAN EDDY, HHMI Janelia Farm Research Campus, Ashburn, Virginia
SARAH C.R. ELGIN, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
DAVID R. FRANZ, Former Cdr USAMRIID, Consultant, Frederick, Maryland
LOUIS J. GROSS, University of Tennessee, Knoxville
RICHARD A. JOHNSON, Arnold & Porter, LLC, Washington, D.C.
JUDITH KIMBLE, University of Wisconsin, Madison
CATO T. LAURENCIN, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut
ALAN I. LESHNER, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C.
BERNARD LO, University of California, San Francisco,
KAREN E. NELSON, J. Craig Venter Institute, Rockville, Maryland
ROBERT M. NEREM, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
CAMILLE PARMESAN, University of Texas, Austin
ALISON G. POWER, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
MARGARET RILEY, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
BRUCE W. STILLMAN, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York
JANIS C. WEEKS, University of Oregon, Eugene
CYNTHIA WOLBERGER, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
MARY WOOLLEY, Research!America, Alexandria, Virginia
STAFF
FRANCES E. SHARPLES, Director

JO L. HUSBANDS, Scholar/Senior Project Director
JAY B. LABOV, Senior Scientist/Program Director for Biology Education
KATHERINE W. BOWMAN, Senior Program Officer
INDIA HOOK-BARNARD, Senior Program Officer
MARILEE K. SHELTON-DAVENPORT, Senior Program Officer
KEEGAN SAWYER, Program Officer
BETHELHEM M. BANJAW, Financial Associate
CARL G. ANDERSON, Program Associate
SAYYEDA AYESHA AHMED, Senior Program Assistant
ORIN E. LUKE, Senior Program Assistant
vi

Preface
This project merits attention for its success in because the Academies’ activities are
linking two areas of important work of the U.S. demonstrating that the foundation for effectively
National Academies to advance contributions of engaging the scientific community to address
the life sciences to health, economic potential risk of misuse is education within a
development, and the environment globally. broader framework of the responsible conduct of
First, the Academies’ path-breaking work has science. I believe this approach offers the best
focused on how people learn, how effective promise of achieving both security and scientific
approaches to teaching can be applied to engage progress available to all.
and prepare a new generation of scientists, and Sincere thanks are owed to all members of
how to put that knowledge into practice to the committee because their commitment and
transform teaching of undergraduate biology in engagement with the project have been
the United States. Second, influential reports of extraordinary. Each worked incredibly hard and
the National Research Council and the Institute several continue to engage with participants in
of Medicine published since the late 1980s have the project to assist in implementing what has
helped establish the norms and standards in the been learned in the course of this activity.
United States and internationally for responsible TheNational Academies staff deserve special
conduct of science. Nevertheless, engagement of recognition, especially Lida Anestidou and Jay
the National Academies in responding to Labov, an amazing team. They brought their
concerns that the rapid advances in the life formidable skills in responsible conduct and
sciences, with their potential for significant scientific teaching, respectively, to the design
benefits, might be misused to cause deliberate and implementation of this project. Jo Husbands
harm has provided an important component of provided invaluable assistance with planning
this report. and oversight of the final report process, and
During the last few decades the scientific Ayesha Ahmed and Carl-Gustav Anderson were
community has made remarkable progress in truly remarkable in their research work and
developing and promulgating the culture of administrative support.
responsibility that has kept the number of Meetings were held in Jordan and Trieste,
laboratory accidents and cases of deliberate Italy, and to our hosts in both of those countries
misuse to vanishingly small numbers. But as a debt of gratitude is acknowledged for their
research capacity extends globally, we need to hospitality and professional assistance. The
take advantage of all that is known about how engagement and enthusiasm of participants in
best to instill those standards so that the research the meetings provided encouragement to
enterprise continues to advance knowledge to continue vigorously promoting both scientific
serve the public and sustain its trust. The project teaching and responsible conduct. I wish to
described in this report is, in part, a response to acknowledge their essential contributions. I
these concerns but it also draws on other work extend my personal thanks, as well as those of
vii

viii Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region
the committee, to the Bibliotheca Alexandrina responsible research in science continues and
and to The World Academy of Sciences our hope is that this report will help light the
(TWAS), our partners in this project. Their way for global understanding and participation.
extensive knowledge of the region informed our
work and their commitment to scientific
excellence made them ideal partners. The task of —Rita R. Colwell, Chair

Acknowledgments
This report was reviewed in draft form by James Revill, University of Sussex, United
individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives Kingdom
and technical expertise, in accordance with Henry J. Silverman, University of Maryland
procedures approved by the National Michelle Withers, West Virginia University
Academies’ Report Review Committee. The
purpose of this independent review is to provide Although these reviewers provided many
candid and critical comments that will assist the constructive comments and suggestions, they
institution in making its published report as were not asked to endorse the conclusions or
sound as possible and to ensure that the report recommendations, nor did they see the final
meets institutional standards for objectivity, draft of the report before its release. The review
evidence, and responsiveness to the study of this report was overseen by Diane Ebert-May,
charge. The review comments and draft Michigan State University. Appointed by the
manuscript remain confidential to protect the National Academies, she was responsible for
integrity of the process. making certain that an independent examination
We thank the following individuals for their of the report was carried out in accordance with
review of this report: institutional procedures and that all review
comments were carefully considered.
Eiman Aleem, University of Arizona and Responsibility for the final content of this report
University of Alexandria, Egypt rests entirely with the authoring committee and
Rosemary Chalk, Washington, DC the institution.
Michael Imperiale, University of Michigan
Peter Mahaffy, The King’s University College,
Canada
ix


Contents
Summary 1
Chapter 1 Introduction 9
Chapter 2 Responsible Conduct and Integrity in Science 23
Chapter 3 The Science of Learning 29
Chapter 4 The Institute 39
Chapter 5 Post-Institute Activities 65
Chapter 6 Evaluation, Insights, and Realities 73
References 87
Glossary 97
Appendices
Appendix A Recommendations from the Warsaw Workshop Report 101
Appendix B Background on The World Academy of Sciences and the Bibliotheca Alexandrina 105
Appendix C Details from the Results of the Planning Meeting 109
Appendix D Active Learning Toolkit and Images 115
Appendix E Biographies of Committee Members and Staff 123
Appendix F Institute Participants 129
Appendix G Documents from the Institute 131
xi


Summary
BACKGROUND the substantial funding that enables research to

take place. Ensuring that scientific research is
A wave of discoveries in the life sciences, carried out responsibly is essential to
supported by new enabling technologies and maintaining the relationship between science
drawing on many fields beyond biology, is and society.
yielding great social and economic benefits and The scientific community itself, through its
promises continuing gains in the future. professional bodies and other groups, plays a
Inspired by this vision, governments across the leading role in fostering and maintaining the
globe, as well as regional and international norms and standards for what constitutes
organizations, are launching strategies and responsible conduct of science. These standards
making investments to apply these advances to also provide the basis for training and education
address challenges related to food, energy, about expectations—and in some cases
economic development, the environment, requirements—for professional and responsible
animal and plant health, and human well-being. behavior. As science becomes an increasingly
One of the exciting aspects of this “Century of global enterprise, a growing number of
Biology” is the diffusion of research capacity and international scientific organizations have joined
infrastructure to many parts of the world, the activities of national bodies to underscore
creating an increasingly global life sciences the ethical imperatives for all involved in
research enterprise. scientific research. In addition, a strong tradition
Along with these hopes and achievements, of self-governance to maintain responsible
however, have come concerns about the conduct in scientific research, often referred to
implications of such rapid advances. Concerns as a “culture of responsibility,” provides the
include uneasiness about how an increased foundation for scientists to respond to societal
understanding of basic life processes, and the concerns.
resulting potential to manipulate and control Life scientists address ethical and safety
them, may result in unintended impacts on the issues in their work through three overlapping
environment or human well-being, or the risk of fields that provide norms and practices to guide
deliberate misuse of knowledge, tools, and research: biosafety, bioethics, and responsible
techniques from the life sciences to cause harm. conduct of research. Biosafety practices, which
How the scientific community responds to have been codified as national and international
these concerns can be considered part of the guidelines, have developed over the last several
broader relationship between science and decades to safeguard the health of laboratory
society. Beyond its fundamental quest for greater workers and avoid accidental or inadvertent
knowledge and understanding, science is releases of dangerous biological agents and
conducted in a social context. Science depends toxins that could harm people or the
on public support, including but not limited to environment. Bioethics encompasses a wide

2 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region
range of ethical issues in different national and engaged in a series of activities to address risks
disciplinary contexts, including basic research, from potential or deliberate misuse of life
medical interventions and specifically clinical sciences research. One major line of work has
settings, and protections for human subjects in been to inform policymakers about these issues
research. Bioethics also engages many disciplines and national and international efforts to
beyond science and medicine, such as politics, minimize, and hopefully prevent, misuse.
law, philosophy, and theology, so there is great Another has identified how best to encourage
diversity in bioethics education programs. The greater engagement by scientists and scientific
third field is known by various names, including organizations through education and raising
“research integrity,” “scientific integrity,” and awareness about the importance of responsible
“research ethics.” In the United States, for conduct in all of its dimensions. The latter
example, the term “responsible conduct of activities have set the stage for a major initiative
research” (RCR) emerged in the late 1980s in by the National Research Council (NRC) of the
response to rising concerns about research U.S. National Academies and its international
misconduct. Over time, the mandate evolved partners to develop and implement a series of
into a variably defined set of policies and strategic approaches to their education activities.
professional standards that suggested The first part of the initiative applies a model
appropriate subjects for instruction. developed by the U.S. National Academies to use
Where and what material students learn active learning methods to improve the quality
about any of the norms and practices in these of undergraduate biology education to the
fields depends on their area of study, educational challenges of creating networks of faculty able to
institution, and stage of education. They may teach about dual use issues (see Box 1-1) in the
receive formal instruction ranging from single context of responsible conduct of science.1
lectures or online modules to full courses. In 2008 the U.S. State Department provided
Informal mechanisms such as mentoring by support for an international workshop,
senior researchers also are important. The scope convened in Warsaw by several international
and quality of education vary widely, but many scientific organizations and organized by the
students still receive little or no exposure to U.S. National Academies and the Polish
education about responsible conduct of research Academy of Sciences, to:
in the United States, and the problem is worse in  survey strategies and resources available
other countries. Proposals and initiatives to internationally for education on dual use
extend the reach and improve the quality of issues and identify gaps,
education for life scientists about responsible  consider ideas for filling the gaps, including
conduct of research coincide with and provide a development of new educational materials
context for a growing interest in education as a and implementation of effective teaching
fundamental component of efforts to address methods, and
concerns about deliberate misuse.  discuss approaches for including education
on dual use issues in the training of life
scientists.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES’S FACULTY
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

1
Dual use refers to research that, although undertaken for
Since the early 2000s, national and
beneficial purposes, has the potential to yield results that
international scientific organizations have been could be misused to cause deliberate harm.

Summary 3
A key feature of the workshop was the inclusion an ad hoc committee of the National Academies,
of experts in the growing body of research on the under the auspices of its Board on Life Sciences,
science of learning about how adults learn and with members from the United States, the
what are therefore the most effective approaches United Kingdom, and Egypt. It was
to teaching about responsible conduct. implemented as a partnership with the
An ad hoc committee under the auspices of Bibliotheca Alexandrina in Alexandria, Egypt,
the National Academies, with substantial and The World Academy of Science (TWAS), in
international membership, produced a report Trieste, Italy, to draw upon those organizations’
from that workshop with a number of extensive ties in the region and increase the
conclusions and recommendations for chance for the initiative to become sustainable.
improving education. One of the major The first phase centered on a planning
recommendations was to create networks of meeting held at TWAS in late spring 2011 to
faculty through train-the-trainer programs using design a general framework for educational
active learning approaches drawn from the institutes for faculty based on the successful
science of learning (a description of active model of the National Academies Summer
learning techniques is in Chapter 3 of this Institute for Undergraduate Biology Education
report). The networks would provide the basis (hereafter NASI) organized by the National
on which to build sustainable efforts to Academies and sponsored primarily by the
introduce issues in the context of responsible Howard Hughes Medical Institute for
conduct of science such as dual use. The project undergraduate biology faculty
described in this report grew out of the (www.academiessummerinstitute.org/). In the
recommendations of that workshop. project’s second phase, the first Institute was
In 2010, the Biosecurity Engagement held in Aqaba, Jordan, in September 2012 for 28
Program (BEP) of the U.S. State Department, participants from Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Libya,
which provided funding for the Warsaw and Yemen. It combined sessions devoted to the
workshop, agreed to support a two-year project content of responsible conduct that
to implement some of the workshop’s key incorporated various active learning techniques
recommendations. The full Statement of Task to model what the participants might do in their
for the project appears in Box S-1. The Middle home institutions. For example, the participants
East–North Africa (MENA) region was chosen discussed a number of real and hypothetical
to test a prototype that might then be applied in cases that illustrated different aspects of
other countries or regions if successful. In responsible science, such as authorship and
addition to the lessons from the Warsaw mentorship, the MMR (measles/mumps/rubella)
workshop about the most effective ways to vaccine and autism, and the controversy in 2011
introduce issues of potential misuse it was hoped and 2012 over the publication of gain-of-
that combining the best pedagogies with function research related to the H5N1 virus.
responsible conduct of science would be an Additional work in small groups gave them
appealing capacity-building opportunity for opportunities to use the techniques they were
faculty in countries that are interested in using acquiring during the Institute to develop
life sciences research for economic growth and materials that would be useful to their individual
improved well-being. academic situations and to present them to other
The project was carried out in stages, as participants prior to returning home.
shown in the Statement of Task, and overseen by

An online survey shortly after the Institute approaches to colleagues at their home
gathered the participants’ initial impressions institutions and in their disciplines.
about their experiences there. In the third and  Teaching about and modeling pedagogy can
final phase, project participants were invited to play a significant role in the success of an
apply for small grants to implement some of the Institute.
combinations of content and methods they  The demanding pace of the Institute made it
designed at the Institute for their home hard for some participants to comprehend
institutions. A small reunion in Amman, Jordan, the concepts and techniques fully and apply
in April 2013 for the leaders of the teams that them during small group work. Future
received grants enabled the participants to Institutes will benefit either by providing
discuss their experiences up to that point, share more time to integrate active learning with
their insights about the Institute, and consider new content or by reducing the breadth or
how their efforts might continue at their both.
institutions and across the MENA region. Their  The design of resources and assessments for
suggestions and lessons provided an important an Institute benefits from particular
component of the formulation of the attention to linguistic and cultural
committee’s findings and conclusions in this differences among participants and
report. facilitators. Working with partners from the
region where the Institute will take place
allows organizers to take into account local
INSIGHTS AND REALITIES: customs, traditions, and cultures in ways
LESSONS FROM THE PROJECT that remove barriers and foster stronger
relationships among organizers and
Insights participants.
 The NASI have demonstrated that a reunion
The NASI model, which involves a variety of of some participants following an Institute
evidence-based approaches to active teaching, can provide new insights about participants'
learning, engagement, and assessment, can be challenges, resources, and opportunities for
adapted to different topics, cultural contexts, networking and for sustaining programs
and countries. In the course of reviewing the (details in Chapter 5). The Institute
design and implementation of this Institute, the described in this report further confirmed
committee identified a number of insights that a reunion can be especially important
including logistical, academic, and cultural for participants from developing countries.
challenges and realities that could help to For example, by the end of the reunion in
improve future projects. Jordan, the scientists who attended agreed
that their ability to conduct their own work
 Active engagement of committee members around responsible conduct and to reach
and Institute leaders before, during, and other colleagues at their home institutions,
after the Institute is crucial. across their individual countries, and in the
 A detailed application and merit-based MENA region as a whole could be expanded
selection process can identify enthusiastic and sustained by establishing a network
and committed participants who will, in among them. They decided to use this
turn, demonstrate the importance of such network to share ideas, common challenges,

Summary 5
and opportunities, and to develop joint teaching about science occurs in English but
proposals for future work. instructors sometimes provide additional
 As with the development of the NASI, new explanations or contexts in Arabic (or
Institutes will require continuing French in Algeria). Similarly, Arabic-
experimentation with and evaluation of all speaking scientists and students may
aspects of their design. Feedback from the interpret English words in ways that are
participants, combined with the results of different from what the organizers intend.
their projects, can play an important role in For example, the facilitator team learned
future iterations. that there is only one Arabic word for the
 The introduction of both new pedagogies two English words “search” and “research,”
and new content at the same time can be a which may contribute to misunderstanding
significant challenge for some participants. the standards for plagiarism in English-
Reviewing background materials in advance language journals among Arabic-speaking
of the Institute can lessen this impact. scientists and students. For example, several
However, materials written in English about participants told the group that when they
new concepts, such as active learning and ask their students to define “research,” their
dual use, may present obstacles for non- common response is to find the information
English speakers. in question on Google or another search
engine. Hence, these students are not
Realities concerned with copying and pasting
information from the Internet into their
 Framing biosafety and dual use issues in the own essays and research reports.
context of responsible science was  Scientific research in the MENA region has
meaningful to many participants. However, advanced remarkably over the last
based on conversations during plenary generation. Nonetheless, participants
discussions with the participants who reiterated that the lack of a formal
attended the reunion meeting in Amman, framework and infrastructure for research in
practical realities such as the lack of basic their countries (e.g., the absence of
scientific equipment, reliable Internet comprehensive policies and oversight
connections, and access to scientific journals structures regarding authorship, peer
impede scientists in this region, and review, research with laboratory animals and
especially those from more impoverished human subjects, and biosafety) makes it
nations, from undertaking research at a level difficult for scientists to follow international
where dual use issues raise concerns for standards and to teach best practices in
them. People undertaking activities where responsible science to their students.
research with dual use potential and/or  As the committee learned from the active
misuse of technologies is to be one of the learning exercise conducted on day 1 of the
topics need to take this reality into account Institute in which participants from each
when planning their events or programs. nation worked together to describe their
 Some concepts that are crucial to active country’s system of higher education (see
learning, responsible science, and dual use Chapter 4), there are similarities and
cannot be expressed in Arabic. In most of differences in education philosophies,
the countries represented at this Institute, approaches to teaching and learning,

facilities, and resources among nations. The revealed a great deal of variation in the ways
differences need to be taken into in which participants in those activities were
consideration when planning future surveyed about their learning and the
Institutes. project’s efficacy. Assessment and evaluation
 The small grants awarded to participants are an issue for science faculty across the
were used creatively to address an array of world. Providing additional guidance and
educational needs that they identified. In models of survey instruments before such
many cases these funds prompted projects are undertaken could provide much
subsequent institutional support to sustain more useful and usable data for future
participants’ instructional activities. initiatives.
However, as also occurs in the United States,
limited funding restricted the ability of these Taken together, these insights offer
motivated science educators to reach larger important lessons for the design and
audiences who would benefit from implementation of future programs in the
instruction on responsible science, biosafety, MENA region as well as in other parts of the
and dual use issues. world.
 At the reunion, discussions following each
presentation and after all presenters had
described their post-Institute activities


Summary 7
Box S-1
Statement of Task
An ad hoc committee appointed by the National Research Council will develop a framework for an
international series of faculty development institutes in key regions around the world with the goal of
promoting and enhancing education about issues related to research in the life sciences with dual use
potential in the context of responsible conduct of science.
The institutes will bring together higher education faculty in the life sciences as well as experts in
related areas to gain greater understanding and experience with methods for effective teaching and
learning, develop curricular materials to facilitate education about dual use issues that they will use in
their classes, and become prepared to be leaders in their communities on these topics.
The project will be conducted in three phases:
 Phase I: Planning. The committee will organize and hold a planning meeting, which will bring
together life science educators from the Middle East–North Africa region with leaders in dual use
issues and science education. The planning meeting will help to answer substantive and logistical
questions that will guide the organization of Phase II, including issues such as scheduling,
language, target audience, and evaluation, outreach and dissemination strategies. A consensus
letter report will be prepared to guide the organization of Phase II and to serve as a model for
organizing similar institutes in the MENA or other regions. In its report, the committee may offer
guidance on the distribution of resources to support implementation and follow-up activities.
 Phase II: First Faculty Development Institute. The committee will organize a first institute that
will feature several invited presentations in addition to workgroups and hands-on exercises. The
committee will identify the topics, select and invite speakers and other participants, and work
with regional hosts in organizing the session.
 Phase III: Implementation and Additional Activities. The committee will work with
participants from the first institute to help them implement what they have learned at their home
institutions. Small amounts of funding to support implementation, such as the development of
new materials, brown bag seminars, or other activities will be made available to at least some of
the participating faculty. A follow-up meeting for institute alumni will take be held approximately
6-9 months after the institute, which a small group of staff and committee members will attend.
The committee will also oversee the preparation of a final consensus report that would provide an
account of the first institute, the activities initiated by the participants at their home institutions, the
discussions at the follow-up meeting of the alumni, and an evaluation of the outcomes. It will also
offer further conclusions about successful practices for preparing faculty to teach about research with
dual use potential.


Chapter 1
Introduction
THE LIFE SCIENCES AND THE to them can be considered part of the broader
RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH relationship between science and society.
Beyond its fundamental quest for greater
To many in the life sciences community, the 21st knowledge and understanding, science is
century will be the “Century of Biology,” just as conducted in a social context. Science depends
the 20th was the “Century of Physics” (National on public support, including but not limited to
Research Council [NRC], 2009a). A wave of the substantial funding that enables research to
discoveries, supported by new enabling take place.
technologies and drawing on many fields
beyond biology, is yielding great social and The ability of science to deliver on its promise
economic benefits and holds out the promise of of practical and timely solutions to the world's
even more widely available gains in the future. problems does not depend solely on research
Inspired by this vision, national governments as accomplishments but also on the receptivity of
well as regional and international organizations society to the implications of scientific
are creating strategies and making investments discoveries. That receptivity depends on the
public’s attitude about what science is finding
to apply continuing developments in the life
and on how it perceives the behavior of
sciences to help solve challenges related to food,
scientists themselves. (Agre and Leshner,
energy, economic development, the
Science, 2010:921)
environment, animal and plant health, and
human well-being (see, for example, African
This relationship has important implications
Union, 2006; OECD, 2009; Bibliotheca
for all members of the scientific community.
Alexandrina, 2012; White House, 2012).
These accomplishments and ambitions are
Even scientists conducting the most
accompanied, however, by concerns about the
fundamental research need to be aware that
implications of such dramatic advances. their work can ultimately have a great impact
Concerns include unease about how increased on society. Construction of the atomic bomb
understanding of basic life processes, and the and the development of recombinant DNA—
resulting potential to manipulate and control events that grew out of basic research on the
them, may result in unintended impacts on the nucleus of the atom and investigations of
environment or human well-being as well as the certain bacterial enzymes, respectively—are
risk of deliberate misuse of knowledge, tools, two examples of how seemingly arcane areas
and techniques from the life sciences to cause of science can have tremendous societal
harm (NRC, 2002, 2004, 2005; IOM, 2010). consequences. The occurrence and
Among a myriad of issues related to the consequences of discoveries in basic research
responsible conduct of science, these security are virtually impossible to foresee.
issues and the scientific community’s response Nevertheless, the scientific community must

recognize the potential for such discoveries Conference on Science, a collaboration of the
and be prepared to address the questions that International Council for Science (ICSU) and
they raise. If scientists do find that their the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
discoveries have implications for some Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which
important aspect of public affairs, they have a proclaims that
responsibility to call attention to the public
issues involved. . . . science and technology The practice of scientific research and the use
have become such integral parts of society that of knowledge from that research should always
scientists can no longer isolate themselves aim at the welfare of humankind, including the
from societal concerns. (NRC, 1995:20-21) reduction of poverty, be respectful of the
dignity and rights of human beings, and of the
The relationship between science and society global environment, and take fully into
also means that changing social attitudes can account our responsibility towards present and
affect the conduct of science. The conduct of future generations,…
research in the life sciences has been particularly
affected by the continuing evolution of social and further that
attitudes and research practices for both human
and animal subjects. In response to appalling All scientists should commit themselves to
abuses, standards were created to govern the high ethical standards, and a code of ethics
treatment of human subjects in experiments based on relevant norms enshrined in
(Beecher, 1966; The Nuremberg Code, 1949; international human rights instruments
WMA, 2008; IOM, 2001). The care and use of should be established for scientific professions.
laboratory animals is another area where The social responsibility of scientists requires
standards continue to evolve (NRC, 2011a; IOM, that they maintain high standards of scientific
2011). As the products of science and technology integrity and quality control, share their
enter the marketplace, both standards and the knowledge, communicate with the public and
ethics of practice become critical for educate the younger generation. Political
authorities should respect such action by
environmental safety as well as public health.
scientists. Science curricula should include
The scientific community, through its
science ethics, as well as training in the history
professional bodies and other groups, plays a
and philosophy of science and its cultural
leading role in fostering and maintaining the
impact. (UNESCO, 1999)2
norms and standards for what constitutes
responsible conduct of science. As discussed
The Singapore Statement, produced by the
below, these also provide the basis for training
Second World Conference on Research Integrity
and education about the expectations—and in
in 2010, includes the principle that “Researchers
some cases, requirements—for professional and
and research institutions should recognize that
responsible behavior. As science has become an
they have an ethical obligation to weigh societal
increasingly global enterprise, a growing number
benefits against risks inherent in their work” (2nd
of statements and declarations from
international scientific organizations have
2
underscored the ethical imperatives for all those Key documents from the World Conference on Science
involved in scientific research. An early example are available at www.unesco.org/science/wcs/, including the
text of the Declaration on Science and the Use of Scientific
is the Declaration on Science and the Use of Knowledge in six languages, www.unesco.org/science/
Scientific Knowledge from the 1999 World wcs/eng/declaration_e.htm.

Introduction 11
WCRI, 2010). Similarly, in 2011 the World community and in the broader society, that
Science Forum adopted a recommendation on explore the implications of research and
“responsible and ethical conduct of research and impose constraints on research if those
innovation.” constraints are justified. (IAC and IAP,
2012:15)
In this era of global science, the scientific
establishment needs to implement continuous These high-level declarations help set the
self-reflection to appropriately evaluate its tone for discussions and can lead to a change in
responsibilities, duties and rules of conduct in attitudes about the importance of responsible
research and innovation. A universal code of conduct. In 2006, for example, ICSU replaced its
conduct addressing the rights, freedoms and Standing Committee on Freedom in the
responsibilities of scientific researchers, and Conduct of Science with a new standing
the universal rules of scientific research should Committee on Freedom and Responsibility in
be shared by the world’s scientific community. the Conduct of Science (emphasis added). While
Furthermore, these rules and policies should maintaining its traditional strong advocacy for
be respected by the states and adopted by their
the principles of the universality of science, such
national legislations.
as the rights of scientists to travel, associate, and
Scientists should strengthen their
communicate freely, the new committee “differs
individual and institutional responsibilities to
significantly from its predecessors in that it has
avoid possible harm to society due to
been explicitly charged with also considering the
ignorance or misjudgment of the
consequences of new discoveries and
responsibilities of scientists” (ICSU, 2008:2).3 In
applications of scientific knowledge. 2011 the ICSU General Assembly adopted an
It is the responsibility of those who amendment to the language of its statute on the
promote science and scientists to maintain the Universality of Science to recognize formally the
primacy of moral and social concerns over importance of responsibility as well as freedom.
short-term economic interest in the selection
and implementation of industrialised research Such practice, in all its aspects, requires
projects. (World Science Forum, 2011) freedom of movement, association, expression
and communication for scientists, as well as
In 2012, an international committee equitable access to data, information, and
convened by the InterAcademy Council (IAC) other resources for research. It requires
and IAP—the Global Network of Science responsibility at all levels to carry out and
Academies (formerly the InterAcademy Panel communicate scientific work with integrity,
respect, fairness, trustworthiness, and
on International Issues) produced its report on
transparency, recognising its benefits and
Responsible Conduct in the Global Research
possible harms.4
Enterprise, which among its findings noted that
Researchers have learned that they cannot

dissociate themselves from the uses of the new
knowledge they generate. They need to take
3
into consideration the reasonably foreseeable The ICSU statement on the universality of science may be
found at www.icsu.org/5_abouticsu/INTRO_
consequences of their own activities. They also
UnivSci_1.html.
have an obligation to participate in the social 4
See www.icsu.org/about-icsu/structure/committees/
mechanisms, both within the research freedom-responsibility/statute-5.

THE “CULTURE OF RESPONSIBILITY” IN cover research “with both recombinant and/or

THE LIFE SCIENCES synthetic nucleic acids” (NIH 2012:1).
The activities of scientists and organizations
A strong tradition of self-governance to involved in synthetic biology and the response in
maintain responsible conduct in scientific late 2011 by flu researchers to the controversy
research, often referred to as a “culture of over publication of experiments resulting in
responsibility” (NRC, 2009b), provides the increased transmissibility of influenza among
foundation for scientists to respond to societal mammals provide recent examples of voluntary
concerns. The iconic example of self-governance actions.6 An example of efforts by a government
is the response of the life sciences community in to address potential societal concerns as an
the early 1970s to new gene splicing techniques integral part of a research program is the Human
that would enable them to create recombinant Genome Project’s formal Ethical, Legal, and
DNA (rDNA) from different organisms. Many Social Implications (ELSI) Program (1990–
of the initial discussions, such as those at a 2003).7
Gordon Research Conference in 1973, As discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2,
concerned potential hazards to laboratory life scientists address ethical and safety issues in
workers or the consequences of an accidental their work through three overlapping fields that
release of rDNA into the environment. This was provide norms and practices to guide research:
followed by letters in Science and Nature from biosafety, bioethics, and responsible conduct of
prominent scientists who called for a temporary research. Biosafety practices, which are codified
moratorium on rDNA experiments to enable an in national and international guidelines, have
assessment of the potential risks. Scientists, as developed over the last several decades to
well as some journalists and legal experts, came safeguard the health of laboratory workers and
together in 1975 in the famous Asilomar avoid accidental or inadvertent releases of
Conference.5 The conference concluded that, dangerous biological agents and toxins that
with appropriate safeguards (i.e., physical and could harm people or the environment.8 The
biological containment procedures), most rDNA World Health Organization (WHO) first
research could continue. The National Institutes published its Laboratory Biosafety Manual
of Health (NIH), which had begun its own (LBM) in 1983; the third edition came out in
reviews of rDNA research in the early 1970s, 2004 (WHO, 2004). In the United States, the
released Guidelines for Research Involving rDNA first edition of the Biosafety in Microbiological
Molecules in 1976. The guidelines provided
procedures and methods for conducting 6
A group of avian influenza researchers declared a year-
research sponsored by NIH, including a long moratorium on further research while international
discussions of security and safety issues took place and a
mechanism for reviewing proposed experiments
number of countries added new measures to address the
at the institutional level and for adjudicating any concerns. A special section in Science in May 2012 provides
cases that could not be resolved there. To extend articles from a number of perspectives (Science, 2012); the
biosafety procedures to developments in the end of the moratorium was announced in January 2013
(Fouchier et al., 2013).
field of synthetic biology, as of March 2013 the 7
For further information, see www.ornl.gov/sci/
Guidelines were expanded for the first time to techresources/Human_Genome/project/hgp.shtml. NIH and
the Department of Energy devoted 3-5 percent of their
5
The Asilomar Conference focused only on the health, annual project budgets to studying ELSI issues.
8
safety, and environmental risks of accidentally creating new For laboratory technicians biosafety training is the
organisms with dangerous properties. primary channel for education about responsible conduct.

Introduction 13
and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL) appeared standards that suggested appropriate subjects for
in 1984; the Centers for Disease Control and instruction but did not mandate a curriculum or
Prevention (CDC) and the NIH produced the 5th require specific topics. That changed in 2000,
edition in 2007 (CDC and NIH, 2007). It is when the Department of Health and Human
important to note that the current editions of Service’s Office of Research Integrity (ORI)
both documents have chapters addressing the issued a policy that required all researchers and
potential risks of deliberate misuse. In Europe, research trainees funded by the Public Health
the 2008 International Laboratory Biorisk Service to undergo training in nine core areas of
Management Standard from the European RCR (ORI, 2000). ORI’s policy itself was short
Committee for Standardization (CEN) provided lived, but formal programs in RCR instruction
a voluntary management system to support the continued to grow. Most recently, in November
implementation of specific biosafety practices as 2009, NIH issued guidelines on topics from
well as ways to reduce the risks of misuse (CEN, which RCR courses could be built. Eight of the
2008). subjects are drawn from ORI’s original core
Bioethics is a diverse field and encompasses a topics, such as the components of research
wide range of ethical issues in different national misconduct (plagiarism, data falsification, and
and disciplinary contexts, including basic data fabrication) and criteria for authorship, but
research, medical interventions and specifically the new ninth area is “the scientist as a
clinical settings, and protections for human responsible member of society, contemporary
subjects in research. Bioethics also engages many ethical issues in biomedical research, and the
disciplines beyond science and medicine, such as environmental and societal impacts of
politics, law, philosophy, and theology, so that scientific research” (NIH, 2009).
there is great diversity in bioethics education Significantly expanding the potential reach
programs (see, for example, AAAS, 2008; Revill of RCR education beyond NIH and biomedical
and Mancini, 2008; Revill, 2009; and Revill et al., research, in 2009 the National Science
2009). Foundation (NSF) mandated that all trainees
The third field is known by various names, supported by, or working on, NSF-funded
including “research integrity,” “scientific research projects must receive RCR instruction.
integrity,” and “research ethics.” In the United NSF is the major funder of basic research in the
States the term “responsible conduct of broader life sciences, including fundamental
research” (RCR) emerged in the late 1980s in sciences in agriculture, and also supports fields
response to rising concerns about research such as physical sciences, engineering, and
misconduct. An influential report from the computer sciences that play growing roles in the
Institute of Medicine (IOM, 1989) increasingly integrated world of life sciences
recommended systematic education to promote research (NRC, 2010). Given that NIH and NSF
responsible research practices. In 1989 the NIH fund international scientists and collaborations,
issued requirements that all those holding their expanded requirements have a global
certain categories of training grants provide impact. These initiatives by U.S. funders
their trainees with instruction in scientific complement a growing international effort to
integrity.9 Over time, the mandate evolved into a raise awareness of responsible science and
variably defined set of policies and professional promote RCR education, for example through
the series of World Conferences on Research
9
The requirement was expanded to cover all training grant Integrity and the concomitant statements on
recipients in 1992 and expanded further in 2009.

various aspects of research integrity issued by might be misused to cause deliberate harm.
them.10 The first World Conference was held in These concerns come in the wider context of a
Portugal in 2007, the second in Singapore in dramatically changed international security
2010, and the third in Canada in 2013. environment, where threats from nonstate
Where and what students learn about any of actors—including a potential willingness to use
the norms and practices depends on their field of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)—are
study, institution, and stage of education. They considered as grave as those nation-states could
may receive formal instruction ranging from pose (United Nations, 2004). In the United
single lectures or online modules to full courses; States, for example, the attacks on September 11,
and informal mechanisms such as mentoring by 2001, and the anthrax mailings a month later
senior researchers play an essential role. As heightened these concerns dramatically and
respected members of the community, mentors focused attention on harmful uses of biological
serve as important messengers for the norms of agents and toxins on a large scale.11 At the same
the profession. time, the publication of a number of scientific
The scope and quality of available education articles early in the 2000s sparked debates about
varies widely, but many students still receive whether the published methods and results of
little or no exposure to education about certain types of experiments could provide a
responsible conduct of research. The proposals “blueprint” or “roadmap” for those who sought
and initiatives to extend the reach and improve to cause harm.12
the quality of education for life scientists about It is noteworthy, however, that the research
responsible conduct of research, such as those that raised the most concern about potential
described above, coincide with and provide a misuse in many cases also promised important
context for a growing interest in education as a potential benefits. Then and now, judgments
fundamental component of efforts to address about relative risks and rewards were seldom
concerns about deliberate misuse. The next simple or definitive (NRC, 2004; Science, 2012).
section discusses this development further. The difficulties and uncertainties associated with
assessing whether and how the results of life
sciences research intended for legitimate and
EDUCATION AS THE FOUNDATION FOR
11
RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH In October 2001, letters containing anthrax were sent to
offices of several media organizations in the United States
as well as to members of Congress. Five people eventually
The Life Sciences and the died, including postal workers who were exposed to
“Web of Prevention” anthrax spores that escaped the letters. An FBI
investigation concluded that the letters had been sent by a
scientist at the U.S. Army Research Institute for Infectious
One of the concerns that has arisen in response Diseases (NRC, 2009b).
to the rapid advances in the life sciences is the 12
Some of the key articles are discussed in Biotechnology
potential risk that the knowledge, tools, and Research in an Age of Terrorism (NRC, 2004:25-29). Epstein
techniques resulting from these discoveries (2001) reviews the issues and policy options under
discussion at the time; Zilinskas and Tucker (2002) reflect
the concerns in the security policy community. These
10
The 2010 Singapore Statement on Research Integrity is discussions have not abated. For example, many similar
available at www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html, concerns were raised more recently about publications
and the 2013 Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in related to the sequencing of the influenza virus from the
Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations at 1918 pandemic (van Aken, 2006; CDC, 2006) and synthetic
www.wcri2013.org/Montreal_Statement_e.shtml. mutations in the H5N1 virus (Science, 2012).

Introduction 15
beneficial purposes could be misused is as well as the positive contributions they can
sometimes referred to as the “dual use dilemma” make to crafting and implementing strategies
(NRC, 2004:1).13 That term and a number of and policies to support continued scientific
others associated with potential misuse remain progress while preventing harm (Royal Society,
the subject of considerable confusion and 2004; NRC, 2004, 2006a, 2011c; IAP, 2005;
debate. Box 1-1 provides definitions and brief WHO, 2007; IAC and IAP, 2012). The preferred
discussions of some of the key terms as they are path to awareness and engagement is generally
used in this report. through widespread education about potential
It is important to underscore that the current risks and how responses fit within the broader
concerns extend beyond the infectious disease perspective of responsible conduct of science
agents that were the focus of past state-level and scientific research. For example, the second
biological weapons programs (Wheelis et al., phase of the IAC-IAP project that produced
2006). Two examples are advances in Responsible Conduct in the Global Research
neuroscience (Royal Society, 2012) and the Enterprise (IAP-IAC, 2012) will create
promise of constructing living organisms de educational materials, based in part on the
novo through synthetic biology (Tucker and model of the widely adopted handbook, On
Zilinskas, 2006; Garfinkel et al., 2007; Mukunda Being a Scientist,16 from the National Research
et al., 2009).14 Council (NRC) of the U.S. National
Investigators in many areas of the life Academies.17 The IAC-IAP resources are
sciences could be affected even if their particular intended to be used by national and regional
research poses no apparent risks. Policy actions scientific organizations to promote discussion
taken in response to perceptions about a about what responsible conduct means in
particular field or research focus could have practice.
direct but also larger indirect consequences for The project described in this report is part of
the research enterprise.15 A shift in public the work of a number of national and
perceptions to see more risks than rewards from international scientific organizations to put such
expanding knowledge and capabilities will have recommendations about engaging scientists into
repercussions for all life scientists. A number of practice. As Chapter 3 discusses, it is also clear
studies have recommended that life scientists from the emerging research literature on human
need to become more aware of and engaged in
discussions about potential misuse of their work,

13
Efforts to foster attention to dual use issues extend
beyond the life sciences and research ethics to include other
fields of science, engineering, and health; NRC (2007a)
provides an example from the United States.
14
The implications of these and other developments are
16
discussed in a report prepared by several national and The third edition (NRC, 2009c) is available at
international scientific organizations (NRC, 2011b). www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12192; the second
15
In the United States, for example, the Select Agent edition (1995) at www.nap.edu/
Program administers an extensive set of regulations catalog.php?record_id=4917.
17
governing approximately 80 biological agents and toxins The National Academies is the collective name for four
that affect humans, plants, and animals. For an account of private, nonprofit U.S. institutions: the National Academy
the development and implementation of the program see of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the
NRC (2009b); current information is available at Institute of Medicine, and the National Research Council.
www.selectagents.gov/. Further information is available at www.nas.edu.

BOX 1-1
Definitions of Key Terms
Dual Use
Traditionally, “dual use” refers to items that have both commercial and military applications.
Obvious examples are helicopters and computers, particularly high-performance ones. It may also have
positive connotations for the “spin-off” of military research and development to benefit the civilian
economy. Research and equipment that supports dual use products may also fall into the dual use
category; very broadly, basic research might not usually be considered dual use, whereas applied research
would.
Concerns arising in the mid- to late 1990s and early 2000s that the results of research in the life
sciences might be misused to cause deliberate harm led to a different use of the term “dual use”: research
intended for beneficial purposes that could be misused for malevolent purposes (see, for example, NRC,
2004). In an attempt to define what should be the appropriate focus of efforts to prevent misuse, the U.S.
National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity proposed a specialized category called “dual use of
concern” (DURC), which it defined in 2007 as “research that, based on current understanding, can be
reasonably anticipated to provide knowledge, products, or technologies that could be directly misapplied
to pose a threat to public health and safety, agricultural crops and other plants, animals, the environment,
or materiel” (NSABB, 2007). More recently, the World Health Organization adopted the term dual use
research of concern for an international workshop on oversight of research in the wake of the H5N1
controversy (see WHO, 2013). Its definition of DURC is “life sciences research intended for benefit, but
with results which might easily be misapplied to produce harm” (WHO, 2013:1).
learning and cognition that learners are able to Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC).19 The BWC
understand issues more deeply, acquire was the first international treaty to ban an entire
knowledge more easily, and retain it for longer class of weapons.20 BWC States Parties are
periods of time when they actively engage with

them rather than confronting them more 19
The formal title of the Geneva Protocol, which prohibits
passively (e.g., by listening to lectures). first use of chemical and biological weapons, is the
The challenge of engaging scientists in “Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of
helping to mitigate the potential misuse of life Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of
Bacteriological Methods of Warfare.” The BWC’s formal
sciences is part of what some in the international
title is the “Convention on the Prohibition of the
law and security community have proposed as a Development, Production and Stockpiling of
“web of prevention” (Rappert and MacLeish, Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on
2007).18 A central element of this web is the Their Destruction.” These two agreements address threats
international norm against the use of disease as a from nation-states; the 2004 UN Security Council
Resolution 1540 extends the prohibitions to cover nonstate
weapon, embodied in two agreements: the 1925
actors.
Geneva Protocol and the 1972 Biological and 20
The 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is the
second WMD prohibition treaty. The increasing
18
The term was coined by the International Committee of convergence of chemistry and biology in research and
the Red Cross in 2002 as part of its “Biotechnology, applications is also fostering greater connections between
Weapons, and Humanity” campaign. the BWC and the CWC.

Introduction 17
Biosafety and Biosecuritya
Two widely available definitions of these terms are:

Biosafety: “Laboratory biosafety describes the containment principles, technologies and practices
that are implemented to prevent the unintentional exposure to pathogens and toxins, or their
accidental release” (World Health Organization [WHO], 2006:iii).
Biosecurity: “the protection, control and accountability for valuable biological materials
[including information] … within laboratories in order to prevent their unauthorized access, loss,
theft, misuse, diversion or intentional release” (WHO, 2006:iii).
Confusion about the terms raises two different types of issues. The most basic is that in quite a
few languages the term “biosecurity” does not exist or is identical with “biosafety.” French, Spanish, and
other Romance languages, as well as German, Russian, and Chinese illustrate this practical problem.
The more serious problem for biosecurity is that the term is already in widespread use for a
number of other international issues. For example, to many “biosecurity” refers to the obligations
undertaken by states adhering to the Convention on Biodiversity and particularly the Cartagena Protocol
on Biosafety, which is intended to protect biological diversity from the potential risks posed by living
modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology.b “Biosecurity” has also been narrowly applied
to efforts to increase the security of dangerous pathogens, either in the laboratory or in dedicated
collections; guidelines from both the World Health Organization (WHO, 2004) and the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2007) use this more restricted meaning of the term. In
an agricultural context, the term refers to efforts to exclude the introduction of plant or animal pathogens.
a
This section is taken from NRC, 2011c:20-21.
b
Further information on the convention is available at www.cbd.int/convention/ and on the Protocol at www.cbd.int/biosafety/.
obligated to “take any necessary measures” attention or initiatives on the part of

appropriate to their legal processes to carry out international bodies such as the World Health
the treaty’s goals. In addition, countries and Organization (WHO, 2005, 2007, 2013) and the
some regional organizations are increasingly Organization for Economic Cooperation and
promulgating laws, regulations, and guidelines Development (OECD, 2004) and from the
to address potential misuse directly or to activities associated with the operation and
contribute indirectly through the governance of implementation of the BWC cited above.21
research and commercial activities.
The concept of a web also assigns an essential
role to measures of self-governance, including

guidelines, “soft law,” codes of conduct, and 21
The papers and presentations during the 2008 meetings
other voluntary practices that could have both of experts and states parties and the 7th BWC Review
nongovernment and possibly government Conference in December 2011 provide a number of
examples. They also underscored the need for the States
components. Institutions such as universities,
Parties to the Convention to take a more active role in
nongovernmental organizations, and scientific supporting the bottom-up initiatives. For further
organizations are providing essential “bottom- information, see the “Meetings and Documents” section on
up” initiatives (NRC, 2009d; Rappert, 2010). the BWC website
These complement the prospects for “top-down” (www.unog.ch/80256EE600585943/(httpPages)/92CFF2CB7
3D4806DC12572BC00319612?OpenDocument.

Origins of the Project organizations; the Polish Academy of Sciences

served as the host in collaboration with an ad
Since the early 2000s, national and international hoc committee with substantial international
scientific organizations have been engaged in a membership under the auspices of the National
series of activities to address the risks of Academies.
potential misuse of the results of life sciences The meeting, which combined plenary
research to cause deliberate harm in the context sessions to introduce topics and breakout
of responsible conduct of science. One major sessions to permit discussions in depth, brought
line of work has been informing policymakers together more than sixty experts from just under
about the implications of trends in the life thirty countries and several international
sciences for the implementation of national and organizations. The participants included active
international efforts to prevent misuse, both in researchers from a range of fields in the life
terms of potential risks and the contributions sciences, specialists in bioethics and biosecurity,
that science and technology can make to and, as one of the workshop’s special features,
reducing them (Royal Society, 2006; NRC, experts in the science of learning. This mix of
2011b). Another has been identifying how best backgrounds and expertise underscored the two
to encourage greater engagement by scientists themes at the heart of the workshop’s design:
and scientific organizations through education
and raising awareness (NRC, 2009d; 2011c).22  To engage the life sciences community, the
The latter activities set the stage for a major new particular security issues related to research
initiative by the National Academies and its with dual use potential would best be
international partners to develop and implement approached in the context of responsible
a strategic approach to their education activities. conduct of research, the wider array of issues
In 2008 the U.S. Department of State asked that the community addresses to fulfill its
the IAP to convene a workshop to: responsibilities to society.
 Education about dual use issues would
 survey strategies and resources available benefit from the insights of the “science of
internationally for education on dual use learning,” the growing body of research
issues and identify gaps, about how individuals learn at various stages
 consider ideas for filling the gaps, including of their lives and careers and the most
development of new educational materials effective methods for teaching them, which
and implementation of effective teaching provides the foundation for efforts in many
methods, and parts of the world to improve the teaching of
 discuss approaches for including education science and technology at all levels of
on dual use issues in the training of life instruction. (NRC, 2011c:3)
scientists. (NRC, 2011c:2)
The workshop also discussed the similar
The workshop (hereafter the Warsaw challenges faced by any effort to introduce new
workshop) was organized as a collaboration of material, such as the competition for space in an
IAP with several other international scientific already crowded curriculum, or an academic
reward structure that did not put high value on
22
Both of these reports, undertaken with a number of innovation or excellence in teaching. One clear
international partners, include accounts of work by message was “the importance of identifying and
national and international scientific organizations.

Introduction 19
supporting ‘champions’ to the success of The discussion also included some models
initiatives” (NRC, 2011c:87). In addition, for more general faculty development that could
participants consistently cited the limited be adapted, in particular the National Academies
number of faculty and instructors able to teach Summer Institutes for Undergraduate Biology
about dual use issues. This led to an extensive Education (NASI) that became the basis for the
discussion of the importance of networks to project described in this report.24
support and sustain efforts to introduce new The NRC committee took responsibility for
topics and new approaches. A number of producing the report, which contained a number
examples related to dual use that also drew on of conclusions and recommendations. Selected
the research about effective teaching—such as conclusions relevant to this project and the full
online faculty development courses from the list of recommendations may be found in
University of Bradford in the United Kingdom Appendix A, but one specific recommendation
and the WHO train-the-trainer courses on is particularly relevant.
biosafety and biosecurity redesigned to escape
an older “death by PowerPoint” approach— Build networks of faculty and instructors
offered potential models for new efforts.23 through train-the-trainer programs,
undertaking this effort if possible in
For all the approaches participants stressed the cooperation with scientific unions and
importance of including plans for post- professional societies and associations. (NRC
training support, both for developing and 2011c:9-10)
implementing new methods and materials and
for sharing lessons learned and best practices.
It is worth noting that some models… CREATING NETWORKS OF FACULTY:
deliberately include small teams rather than THE MIDDLE EAST–NORTH AFRICA
single individuals from a given institution in PROJECT
order to enhance the chances of sustaining
what is learned and a commitment to In 2010, the Biosecurity Engagement Program
implementation is part of the selection (BEP) of the U.S. Department of State, which
process. The champions…may also help to
provided the funding for the Warsaw workshop,
create and sustain a more hospitable climate
agreed to support a two-year project to
for new content and methods. In addition to
implement some of the workshop’s key
supporting work at home institutions, some
recommendations. The broad goal of the project
models for building networks of faculty and
was to “develop a framework for an
instructors also bring graduates together after
their training for special follow-up activities to
international series of faculty development
reinforce what was learned, while others rely institutes in key regions around the world with
on the normal cycle of meetings that take place the goal of promoting and enhancing education
in a discipline or professional field to provide about issues related to research in the life
convening opportunities (NRC, 2011c:89). sciences with dual use potential in the context of
responsible conduct of science.” The full

23
Two examples of other dual use–related projects that
24
have taken place since the Warsaw workshop that include The general characteristics of faculty development
active learning are EUBARnet (2012) and Novossiolova et programs, one variant of train-the-trainer models, are
al. (2013). discussed in Chapter 3.

Statement of Task (SOT) for the project is institutes might be adapted and organized in
shown in Box 1-2. other contexts.
The project was overseen by an ad hoc NRC The BEP program operates in many parts of
committee with members from the United the world, but it emphasizes certain regions and
States, Europe, and Egypt (see Appendix E). The priority countries with them. After consultation
committee interpreted the “framework” in the with the sponsor, the Middle East–North Africa
SOT as concerned with the design of the (MENA) region was chosen to test a prototype
institutes and not the development of underlying that could then be applied in other countries or
concepts. The project in fact builds on the regions. In addition to the lessons from the
concepts related to responsible science and dual Warsaw workshop about the most effective ways
use issues developed in the course of almost a to introduce issues of potential misuse, the
decade of work by the National Academies and committee hoped combining the best pedagogy
other organizations already discussed in this with responsible conduct of science would be an
chapter, as well as on other concepts related to appealing capacity-building opportunity for
active learning described in Chapter 3 that faculty in countries interested in using life
reflects a comparably long National Academies sciences research for economic growth and
engagement. improved wellbeing.
This report is intended to be useful to a The project was carried out in stages as a
number of audiences: partnership with the Bibliotheca Alexandrina in
Alexandria, Egypt, and The World Academy of
 Scientists in the Middle East–North Africa Sciences (TWAS), in Trieste, Italy (see Appendix
(MENA) region and elsewhere who may not B). The two institutions’ standing and extensive
have considered the issues addressed in the networks in the region were essential to the
Institute and want information about the effective implementation of the project.
concepts associated with responsible science Unfortunately, continuing political uncertainties
and ideas about how to introduce the in the MENA region in the wake of the Arab
material into their classrooms and Spring necessitated a number of delays and
institutions. changes, prolonging the project by about a year.
 Program managers and funders who might The first phase centered on a planning meeting
support projects related to dual use issues, held at TWAS in late spring 2011 to design a
responsible conduct, or capacity building in general framework for educational institutes for
the life sciences and be interested in new faculty based on the NASI model; a description
approaches. of NASI is provided in Chapter 3.25 In the
 Experts in responsible conduct who might project’s second phase, discussed in detail in
not be familiar with active learning Chapter 4, the first Institute was held in Aqaba,
techniques. Jordan, in September 2012 for 28 participants
 Experts in active learning who might not from Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Libya, and Yemen.
have considered how the approaches could An online survey shortly after the Institute
be applied to new areas. gathered the participants’ initial impressions. In
the third and final phase, project participants
It has a strong emphasis on practical applied for small grants to implement some of
implementation and tries to provide sufficient
25
detail to give readers a sense of how similar In the context of this report, the terms “workshop” and
“institute” are interchangeable.

Introduction 21
the content/methods combinations they and continued scientific progress.

designed at the Institute in Jordan in their home Chapter 2 elaborates on the development
institutions.26 In April 2013 a small reunion for and current status of the basic concepts and
the leaders of the teams that received grants in approaches to education and training in the
Amman, Jordan, enabled the participants to responsible conduct of science. Chapter 3
discuss their experiences up to that point and provides an overview of the science of learning,
also share their insights about the Institute. research that reveals how people learn and how
Their suggestions and lessons provided to use the insights on human learning and
important input into the formulation of the cognition to improve teaching practices. As
committee’s findings and conclusions for this noted above, commitment to supporting the best
report. possible pedagogy is a key feature of the MENA
project. These two chapters are intended to offer
quick primers for readers with expertise in one
STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT but not necessarily both of the subjects. Chapter
4 describes the planning meeting and the first
This chapter has provided an introduction to Institute, held in Jordan in September 2012,
how concerns about potential misuse of while Chapter 5 discusses the activities
advances in the life sciences can be addressed in undertaken by participants after the Institute to
the context of responsible conduct of science implement what they learned. Chapter 6 offers a
and the essential role that education plays in preliminary evaluation of the Institute, along
fostering the engagement of the scientific with the committee’s findings, conclusions, and
community in responses that seek both security ideas for the future.

26
The project was able to support five grants and BEP
provided funds to support another three.

Box 1-2
Statement of Task
An ad hoc committee appointed by the National Research Council will develop a framework for
an international series of faculty development institutes in key regions around the world with the goal of
promoting and enhancing education about issues related to research in the life sciences with dual use
potential in the context of responsible conduct of science.
The institutes will bring together higher education faculty in the life sciences as well as experts in
related areas to gain greater understanding and experience with methods for effective teaching and
learning, develop curricular materials to facilitate education about dual use issues that they will use in
their classes, and become prepared to be leaders in their communities on these topics.
The project will be conducted in three phases:
 Phase I: Planning. The committee will organize and hold a planning meeting, which will bring
together life science educators from the Middle East–North Africa region with leaders in dual use
issues and science education. The planning meeting will help to answer substantive and logistical
questions that will guide the organization of Phase II, including issues such as scheduling,
language, target audience, and evaluation, outreach and dissemination strategies. A consensus
letter report will be prepared to guide the organization of Phase II and to serve as a model for
organizing similar institutes in the MENA or other regions. In its report, the committee may offer
guidance on the distribution of resources to support implementation and follow-up activities.
 Phase II: First Faculty Development Institute. The committee will organize a first institute that
will feature several invited presentations in addition to workgroups and hands-on exercises. The
committee will identify the topics, select and invite speakers and other participants, and work
with regional hosts in organizing the session.
 Phase III: Implementation and Additional Activities. The committee will work with
participants from the first institute to help them implement what they have learned at their home
institutions. Small amounts of funding to support implementation, such as the development of
new materials, brown bag seminars, or other activities will be made available to at least some of
the participating faculty. A follow-up meeting for institute alumni will take be held approximately
6-9 months after the institute, which a small group of staff and committee members will attend.
The committee will also oversee the preparation of a final consensus report that would provide an
account of the first institute, the activities initiated by the participants at their home institutions, the
discussions at the follow-up meeting of the alumni, and an evaluation of the outcomes. It will also offer
further conclusions about successful practices for preparing faculty to teach about research with dual use
potential.

Chapter 2
Responsible Conduct and Integrity in Science
This chapter is intended to provide additional EVOLVING TERMINOLOGY AND

information to build on the discussion in DEFINITIONS
Chapter 1 of the development of concepts of
scientific responsibility and the ways in which As with most new concepts, key terminology
those concepts are taught to students and related to research integrity has evolved with
practitioners. The integrity of research and discussion of its central themes and specific
ethical grounding of science have been issues. The larger concept of integrity in science
prominent concerns of international research was first formally defined in two reports from
institutions, professional societies, and funding the National Academies (IOM, 1989; NRC,
agencies for the past three decades. In the 1980s, 1992). Both used the term integrity in a way that
professional and governmental attention to the emphasized researchers’ honesty. In 1989, the
growth and increasing complexity of life sciences Institute of Medicine’s Committee on the
research led to multidisciplinary efforts to define Responsible Conduct of Research in the Health
research integrity and responsible conduct of Sciences defined integrity in research to mean
research in concrete terms. Much of this effort “that the reported results are honest and
started in the United States, where it gained accurate and are in keeping with generally
prominence in response to high-profile cases of accepted research practices” (IOM, 1989:v). In
research misconduct—the fabrication or 1992, the Panel on Scientific Responsibility and
falsification of research data and the theft of the Conduct of Research published the report
others’ ideas, words, and data through Responsible Science, which highlighted the
plagiarism. Since those early years, a large and integrity of the research process. In this context,
increasingly comprehensive body of standards the committee defined integrity as “the
for ethical and scientifically sound research adherence by scientists and their institutions to
practices has developed, and researchers at many honest and verifiable methods in proposing,
levels are encouraged to pursue formal study and performing, evaluating, and reporting research
dissemination of these practices. Ongoing activities” (NRC, 1992:17).
instruction in responsible conduct of research is While honesty remains the focal point of
now commonly accepted in science education, research integrity, today’s definitions typically
particularly in pre- and postdoctoral training. include regulatory compliance and adherence to
The integrity of the research process is professional standards in the research process.
recognized to be “critical for excellence, as well For example, the U.S. National Institutes of
as public trust, in science” (NSF, 2009). Health policy guide defines research integrity as:
23

 The use of honest and verifiable methods in more instruction on professional standards of
proposing, performing, and evaluating practice and the scientist’s role in society (NRC,
research; 1995).
 Reporting research results with particular Over the past two decades, however,
attention to adherence to rules, regulations, instruction in responsible conduct of research
guidelines; and has increasingly focused on the elements of
 Following commonly accepted professional research practice and the ethical values and
codes or norms. (NIH, 2012) professional norms of science. Current NIH
policy on research training grants defines
responsible conduct of research as “the practice
EDUCATION IN THE RESPONSIBLE of scientific investigation with integrity,” which
CONDUCT OF RESEARCH includes “awareness and application of
established professional norms and ethical
The term responsible conduct of research— principles in the performance of all activities
frequently referred to by its acronym RCR— related to scientific research” (NIH, 2009).
emerged during this same period as research In 2000, a decade after NIH’s initial training
funders and academic research institutions grant mandate for instruction in responsible
endeavored to distinguish research misconduct conduct of research, the Department of Health
from the processes and activities that constituted and Human Services’ Office of Research
good scientific practice (IOM, 1989; NIH, 1990; Integrity (ORI) proposed a new educational
NRC, 1992). The concept became particularly policy to extend NIH’s requirement for RCR
important in education policy following a 1990 instruction in training grants to everyone funded
amendment to the NIH’s policies on research by Public Health Service grants, not just research
training grants. The amendment required the trainees (ORI, 2000). This policy was short lived,
mandatory instruction in RCR that was part of due largely to the anticipated costs of providing
all institutional research training grants to add such an extensive educational activity across the
instruction on professional ethics and regulatory federally funded research enterprise (Steneck
standards (NIH, 1990). and Bulger, 2007). Nonetheless, the policy’s
Initially the content of such instruction was impact on education was significant in that ORI
not defined. Formal textbooks and other defined nine core areas for instruction that
curricular materials developed both before and contained the knowledge, skills, and attitudes
in response to the training grant mandate essential to responsible conduct. These nine core
covered a wide array of issues that grew both areas were:
broader and more concrete over time (Heitman
and Bulger, 2005). For example, the first edition  Data acquisition, management, sharing, and
of the National Academies’ On Being a Scientist, ownership
published in 1989, examined the nature of  Mentor/trainee responsibilities
scientific research and the social mechanisms of  Publication practices and responsible
science from a largely historical and sociological authorship
perspective (NRC, 1989). In 1995, the second  Peer review
edition, subtitled Responsible Conduct in  Collaborative science
Research, expanded its discussion of the social  Human subjects
and historical context of science to incorporate  Research involving animals

Responsible Conduct and Integrity in Science 25
 Research misconduct  Responsible authorship and publication

 Conflict of interest and commitment.27 practices and
 The scientist as a responsible member of
Although ORI suspended the policy in 2001, society, contemporary ethical issues in
its nine core instructional areas provided a biomedical research, and the environmental
common framework for the development of and societal impacts of scientific research.28
practice standards and research policy, as well as
a wide range of educational resources. Even after
the policy was withdrawn, various curricular INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON
materials, including the National Academies’ RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND
third edition of On Being a Scientist (NRC, RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH
2009c), were revised and expanded to address
the nine core areas and explore case studies in Since the early 2000s, several multinational
which relevant professional standards were at professional organizations have worked to
issue. elaborate practice standards and ethical norms
In 2009, both NIH and the U.S. National for worldwide adoption, particularly in the life
Science Foundation updated their requirements sciences. The European Science Foundation
for instruction in responsible conduct of (ESF), a multinational organization with
research, enlarging, reconfiguring, and member societies in 23 countries, issued its first
reprioritizing the core areas and including, for major statement on research integrity, Good
the first time, formal attention to the practices Scientific Practice in Research and Scholarship, in
related to biosafety and research with dual use December 2000 (ESF, 2000). At that time, a
potential (NIH, 2009; NSF, 2009). Today’s variety of member organizations had developed
research integrity educators are now called upon country-specific policies on research misconduct
to emphasize the following core areas of and guidelines on responsible research, but these
responsible conduct: standards were not well integrated. ESF’s
statement emphasized the importance of
 Conflict of interest professional governance and researchers’
 Policies regarding human subjects, live honesty at all stages of scientific inquiry. ESF
vertebrate animal subjects in research, and called for member organizations to develop both
safe laboratory practices national and European-level codes of good
 Mentor/mentee relationships and scientific practice and to pursue the
responsibilities harmonization of national standards.
 Collaborative research, including In December 2007, ESF and ORI published
collaborations with industry Research Integrity: Global Responsibility to Foster
 Peer review Common Standards (ESF, 2007), a catalogue of
 Data acquisition and laboratory tools, international activities in research integrity that
management, sharing and ownership also reported on the workshop Best Practices for
 Research misconduct Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Preventing
Misconduct, sponsored by the Organization for

27 28
See http://oprs.usc.edu/files/2013/01/PHS_Policy_on See http://oprs.usc.edu/files/2013/01/PHS_Policy_on
_RCR1.pdf. _RCR1.pdf.

Economic Cooperation and Development’s On a wider, global level, IAP–The Global

(OECD) Global Science Forum, which had Network of Science Academies (formerly the
sought to foster international cooperation in the InterAcademy Panel on International Issues), an
development of policy and administrative organization of over 100 national academies of
systems in international science (OECD, 2007). science, has also been a leader in promoting
A related expert group from the European research integrity and responsible conduct of
Commission (EC) recommended that the research.29 The 2012 policy report Responsible
Commission take the lead in developing Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise,
European standards, harmonizing definitions produced as a cooperative project with the
and principles, and investigate emerging issues InterAcademy Council (IAC), offers an
in transnational research. The following year, international consensus statement on the
ESF published Stewards of Integrity (ESF, 2008), meaning of responsible conduct and the way to
a review of European policies and programs that promote it (IAC and IAP, 2012). The report
supported good scientific practices. ESF’s survey concludes that:
found governmental and nongovernmental
organizations in all of its member countries that  Researchers have the primary responsibility
had begun to articulate standards of responsible for maintaining standards of responsible
research. research and should agree on the standards
In 2010, ESF issued a background report, to be observed in multidisciplinary
Fostering Research Integrity in Europe, which collaborations.
outlined a framework for shared governance of  Research institutions should develop clear
research integrity and recommended that ESF definitions and rules about responsible
and All European Academies (ALLEA) endorse conduct and foster an environment of
European standards (ESF, 2010). In 2011, the integrity, including the establishment of
ESF Member Organization Forum on Research effective mechanisms for addressing
Integrity and ALLEA finalized the European allegations of misconduct.
Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ESF  Institutions and agencies should support
and ALLEA, 2011). The Code identified eight responsible, high-quality work through
principles for all researchers, research funding practices that emphasize quality
organizations, universities and funders to over quantity of results.
observe:  Journals and investigators should publish
only original material.
 Honesty in communication
 Reliability in performing research
 Objectivity
 Impartiality and independence
 Openness and accessibility 29
IAP was founded in 1993 to help national science
 Duty of care academies advise their respective national policymakers on
global scientific issues; for more information, see
 Fairness in providing references and giving
www.interacademies.net/. The InterAcademy Council
credit (IAC) is an IAP Observer organization, established in 2000
 Responsibility for the scientists and as a source of expert scientific advice for global
researchers of the future. (ESF and ALLEA, organizations such as the United Nations. For further
2011:5) information about IAC, see www.interacademycouncil.net/.

Responsible Conduct and Integrity in Science 27
INCORPORATING STANDARDS OF  How the standards of open publication of

BIOSAFETY, BIOSECURITY, AND study design and methods as well as research
DUAL USE RESEARCH INTO THE results and interpretation may present
INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION challenges for work that explores novel
INITIATIVES ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY infections or techniques with dual use
AND RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF potential; and
RESEARCH  The growing role of scientific and ethical
peer review in decisions about funding for
Emerging ethical questions and standards of research with dual use potential and
practice in biosafety, biosecurity, and research publication of its results.
with dual use potential fit readily into the broad
spectrum of issues addressed in RCR education. An additional approach to teaching about
Three of NIH’s recently defined areas for RCR biosafety, biosecurity, and dual use issues as part
education are directly relevant to biosafety and of RCR education has been advocated by
dual use issues: policies on safe laboratory proponents of a researcher’s code of ethics. In
practices, the scientist as a responsible member 2005, the U.S. National Science Advisory Board
of society, and the social and environmental for Biosecurity (NSABB) recommended
impacts of research.30 Moreover, as the cases developing a “Code of Ethics for Life Scientists,”
discussed in Chapter 4 illustrate, relevant issues and in 2007 published guidelines for developing
arise in the majority of the broader core areas. a code of conduct for dual use research (NSABB,
For example, RCR education in the life sciences 2007). NSABB later outlined core professional
can readily address the following topics: responsibilities and general research
responsibilities that could be incorporated into a
 Mentors’ responsibility for ensuring that code of conduct related to dual use research in
trainees work safely in the laboratory, and the life sciences (NSABB, 2010). Several
trainees’ responsibility for learning and prominent life scientists and science policy
practicing safe laboratory and clinical scholars have also proposed a “Hippocratic Oath
methods, asking for guidance when they feel for scientists” that both students and established
unsure, and reporting spills and exposures; investigators can use as a point of reference for
 The secure collection, documentation, and professional behavior (Rotblat, 1999; Jones,
management of research data, and policies, 2007; Cressey, 2007; Lehn, 2011). Most such
regulations, and best practices regarding codes incorporate a provision against doing
ownership and sharing of data and research harm through research, which would prompt
tools with dual use potential; reflection on research integrity as well as dual
 How collaborative research, particularly use potential.
across national borders, is governed by As noted in Chapter 1, a strong theme for
national and international regulatory education and outreach related to dual use issues
standards on the shipping of materials, and is to treat the topic within a broader framework
how export controls define security interests of responsible conduct of research. Examples of
and threats; how this framing works in practice may be

30
These topics have been addressed, for example, during
discussions at meetings of the Biological Weapons
Convention.

found in the activities of the IAP Biosecurity (IAP, 2005). In cooperation with other
Working Group, established in 2004 to international scientific organizations, the group
undertake IAP’s work at the intersection of organized the 1st and 2nd International Forums
science and security, with a focus on dual use on Biosecurity in 2005 and 2008, respectively;
issues.31 From the beginning, the group couched education and codes of conduct were discussed
its work in the context of responsible conduct of in both meetings.32 These activities led to the
science and the social responsibility of science. State Department’s request to hold the workshop
The group’s first product, the 2005 IAP on Challenges and Opportunities for Education
Statement on Biosecurity, identified About Dual Use Issues in the Life Sciences, which
“fundamental issues that should be taken into in turn led to the project that is the subject of
account when formulating codes of conduct” this report.

32
The first forum did not produce a report, although the
31
The current membership includes the national academies agenda and participants list are available at http://nas-
of Australia, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Nigeria, Poland sites.org/biosecurity/international/; the report of the second
(chair), Pakistan, Russia, the United States, and the United forum was produced by the National Research Council
Kingdom. (2009d).

Chapter 3
The Science of Learning
This chapter offers a brief primer on the concept more intensely than does traditional instruction.
of active learning, summarizing the growing In all cases, the instructional methods (1) are
research base and introducing its applications in based on, assessed by, and validated through
a variety of educational settings.33 After research on teaching and learning, (2)
outlining some of the general characteristics of incorporate classroom and/or other activities
common approaches to faculty development that require all students to express their thinking
programs, it then describes a program developed through speaking, writing, or other actions that
by the National Academies to apply the concepts go beyond listening and taking notes, and (3)
in an effort to improve undergraduate biology have been tested repeatedly in actual classroom
education. As mentioned in Chapter 1, that settings and have resulted in objective evidence
National Academies program is the model for a of improved learning. Learner-centered
new international project to develop networks of environments are more likely to be collaborative,
life sciences faculty able to apply active learning inquiry based, and relevant (Brewer and Smith,
methods to responsible conduct and dual use 2011). The research suggests that there are many
issues. Chapter 4 will repeat much of the basic teaching strategies that can support active
material presented in this chapter, but in the learning. These range from problem-
context of how it was presented and modeled in solving/discussion sessions in class to original
a real learning situation. investigations that may be student designed.
Methods for active learning instruction have Table 3-1 contains descriptions of a variety of
been under development and refinement for active learning techniques, with illustrations of
more than 130 years. A large and growing body how they might be used in biology classes.
of evidence, cutting across scientific disciplines, The methodology has been effective in
is demonstrating that modern versions of these various settings, from small groups to large
methods offer the potential for significantly lecture-based courses.34 At the college level,
improved learning in comparison to traditional,

student-passive, lecture-based instruction (NRC, 34
Engaging students in active learning in large class settings
2000; Handelsman et al. 2007; Knight and such as lecture halls has garnered much attention from
Wood, 2005; Prince, 2004; NRC, 2011d; Meltzer education researchers. A number of techniques, including
and Thornton, 2012). A common feature of the use of individual wireless response systems (clickers)
that allow students to answer questions anonymously,
active learning instruction is that it involves
“think-pair-share” techniques in which students develop
students in their own learning more deeply and their own answers to questions and then discuss their
answers with a student next to them (often combined with
clicker questions), and similar exercises involving peer
33
Many of the terms associated with active learning are learning and engagement have proven to be valuable active
defined in the Glossary. learning tools in these kinds of settings. For additional
29

formal active learning has been used in courses pathways to factual knowledge and deeper
that range from introductory undergraduate to conceptual understanding (NRC, 2006b).
graduate level. The data show that there is no However, the science education community is
significant difference in the positive results now beginning to view the entire course
achieved by predominately female or male, and (classroom, laboratory, and field experiences),
heterogeneous or mixed gender groups. especially at the introductory level, as an
However, the positive effect of small-group opportunity to integrate content with scientific
learning was significantly greater for groups processes and skills and to help students
composed primarily of African American and understand and appreciate the relevance of
Latino students compared with predominantly science to their own lives and that of their
Caucasian and relatively heterogeneous groups communities (Labov, 2004; Handelsman et al.,
(Springer et al., 1997). Additionally, workshops 2006; AAAS, 2011; PCAST, 2012; NRC, 2012a).
for teachers and college and university faculty Critical reflection, as called for in the third
increasingly use active learning methods. strand, is an essential component of virtually all
It has been demonstrated that to be well effective approaches to learning. To date, this is
understood, factual knowledge must be put in a the only practice that has demonstrated student
suitable conceptual framework. The data show learning gains in understanding the nature of
that framing learning in the sciences as four science (NRC, 2006b, 2008). Reflection provides
intertwined strands of proficiency provides a students with the opportunity to explore their
sound basis for creating effective teaching and level of understanding with other learners (and
learning experiences at all levels (NRC, 2007b, the teacher) and helps them become more aware
2011d); these are: of their own levels of learning. Students become
able to self-monitor their learning, they plan and
 understanding scientific explanations, set goals, and they have many opportunities to
 generating scientific evidence, reflect on their learning and adapt as necessary.
 reflecting on scientific knowledge, and The value of such “metacognition,” or self-
 participating productively in science. monitoring of one’s learning, has been
demonstrated by many studies and is a critical
A critically important aspect of effective component of effective teaching and learning
instruction is the integration of learning about strategies (Zimmerman and Schunk, 2001).
process and content. Although this is not always Active learning, properly implemented,
the case in practice, science teaching laboratories encourages metacognition. Given the
historically have been viewed by many faculty as complexities of the ethical and social dimensions
the place to provide valuable and unique in the responsible conduct of science, it is also
opportunities for the learner to engage in important to include time for various forms of
conceptual materials. Rather than being viewed reflection throughout a course.
as an add-on or distraction from content Research shows that understanding is built
mastery, the laboratory is one of the many on a foundation of existing conceptual
frameworks and experiences. While prior
knowledge can support further learning, it may
information about encouraging active learning in large
class settings for different disciplines, see for example also lead to pre- or misconceptions that act as
MacGregor et al., 2000; Allen and Tanner, 2005; Caldwell, barriers to learning. Prior understandings are
2007; Poirier and Feldman, 2007; Stranger-Hall et al., 2010; influenced by culture, which has implications for
Wood and Tanner, 2012)

The Science of Learning 31
TABLE 3-1 Examples of Learning Objectives and Active Learning Techniques
Biology Example and Instructions Objectives

Brainstorming
Answering the following question in large Brainstorming elicits responses from large
group. One person records answers. Optional: audience and aggregates them into a single list. It
Arrange the list into two or more categories provides the instructor and students with an
(e.g., abiotic vs. biotic factors) overview of the group’s collective knowledge. By
separating the brainstorm list into two or more
Question: What does a plant need to survive
categories, students evaluate how well they
understand the role of each response in a specific
context.
Case study and decision making
Read the following case. Write a paragraph to Cases engage students in solving a problem in a
explain what the patient should do next. Justify real-life context. To solve them, students need to
your recommendation with biological reasons. evaluate what they know about infectious
disease, causal agents, and antibiotic resistance;
Case: A patient expressed eye irritation, which
apply that knowledge to the case; and determine
the doctor diagnosed as conjunctivitis.
what additional information is needed to make a
Antibiotic treatment alleviated the symptoms
recommendation.
within a few days, but the symptoms returned
two weeks later. The doctor recommended
taking antibiotics again.
“Clicker” questions
Answer the following question on your Clicker questions require students to gauge
electronic response keypad. whether they understand a concept or topic,
thereby engaging students in the ensuing
Question: Which organisms are most distantly
activities (e.g., lecture) about that topic.
related? (a) bacteria and archaea; (b) plants and
animals; (c) plants and fungi; (d) humans and
fungi
Group exams
Work with a group to discuss the following Group exams engage students in working
statement. Write your answer individually. collaboratively to identify creative solutions to a
problem. Writing individual answers requires
Statement: Explain the role of aflatoxin in liver
students to evaluate how well they understand
cancer.
the topic and its underlying concepts.


Mini-map
Arrange the following terms in logical order. Mini-maps engage students in developing a non-
Explain (using arrows or words) how the terms verbal representation of a concept. The process
relate to each other. of developing a visual arrangement requires
students to evaluate different ways that terms
Terms: tRNA, DNA, protein, mRNA, amino
can relate to each other and to appreciate that a
acid, translation, transcription, replication,
biological process may not be unidirectional or
promoter
linear.
One-minute paper
Write for one minute to answer the following One-minute papers engage students in
question. articulating their knowledge about a topic or
Question: What about the structure of DNA applying their knowledge to another situation.
suggests a mechanism for replication? By writing their answer in one minute, students
need to evaluate the most important and
relevant components of their argument.
Pre/post questions
Write for one minute at the beginning and end Pre/post questions can take many forms,
of class in response to the following statement. including one-minute papers or clicker
Explain any differences between your responses. questions. They engage students in thinking
Statement: Describe two mechanisms that a critically about a specific question or problem.
bacterium can use to harm a plant. By comparing pre/post responses, students
evaluate whether and why their answers changed
during the class period.
Strip sequence
Use your textbook as a guide and work with a Strip sequences engage students in recognizing
partner. You write the important steps in cause and effect and in determining the logical
meiosis; your partner writes the important steps sequence of events. When students derive their
in mitosis. Cut the steps apart and scramble the own strip sequences, they need to evaluate the
order. Each of you should try to put the other critical steps in the process.
person’s steps into the correct order. Discuss.
Statement correction
Discuss with a partner what is wrong with the Statement corrections engage students in
following statement. Propose an alternative evaluating what concepts are misrepresented
statement that is correct. and in determining what information they need
Statement: “I don’t want to eat any viruses or to correct it.
bacteria, so I refuse to buy foods that have been
genetically modified.”
SOURCE: From Scientific Teaching by Handelsman, Miller, and Pfund. Copyright © 2007 by W.H.
Freeman and Company. Used with permission.

the development of curricular materials that may Even though much of the research cited and
be used to teach responsible conduct of research the examples referenced above have occurred in
for international audiences (NRC, 2008). The the United States, a growing number of
importance of engaging learners’ prior countries are undertaking efforts to reform and
understanding as they learn new material is an transform the way that science is taught.
important insight from the science of learning Collaborations between U.S. and non-U.S.
(summarized in NRC, 2000). universities are assessing the effectiveness of
Faculties are adept at designing curricula to active learning in a variety of contexts. A study
engage students in key scientific practices: talk conducted simultaneously in Sweden and the
and argument, modeling and representation, United States suggests that curricula that actively
and learning from investigations (NRC, 2008). engage the student do appear to make a
They are less facile at course design with active permanent change in their conceptual
learning as a goal. Most instructors first select framework. As long as 2½ years after the
the textbook, then compile the course syllabus instruction, students had a “good” grasp of
and assignments, construct the examinations, concepts (Bernhard, 2001). A review of the
and finally describe learning goals and literature finds there is broad but uneven
objectives. Active learning courses are best support for the core elements of active learning
designed when the first step is the identification (Prince, 2004). “Students who learn in small
of goals and objectives and then the syllabus. groups generally demonstrate greater academic
This “backward design” process (Wiggins and achievement, express more favorable attitudes
McTighe, 2005), also called reverse design, is toward learning,” and remain enrolled in
intended to ensure that learning objectives science, technology, engineering, and
inform instructional and assessment strategies mathematics (STEM) courses and programs “to
through explicit articulation of these two critical a greater extent than their more traditionally
components of the learning process and then taught counterparts” (Springer et al.,1997:42).
integrate them into the design of the course at Conferences of international scientific
the outset. unions and other professional organizations
Assessment of student learning should be now routinely include sessions that feature
both formative and summative. Formative symposia, workshops, or other sessions that
assessment is generally low stakes (either none emphasize teaching and learning. The
or a small portion of the student’s grade) and is International Brain Research Organization
used regularly throughout the learning process, (IBRO), a global network for neuroscience
providing feedback to both students and faculty research, organizes “Teaching Tools
about student learning and academic progress. Workshops” that assist African countries in
Summative assessment, conducted at the end of adding or improving the teaching of
the block or course, provides information about neuroscience. The workshops include both
student learning gains and the overall success of content and teaching methods, with a strong
the effort. Both formative and summative focus on learner-centered approaches.35 The
assessments should be used for subsequent 2012 Lilly Conference on College and University
course/curriculum restructuring. Without Teaching, which draws participants from the
assessment that is closely aligned to learning
objectives, it is difficult to determine the 35
Further information is available at http://dels-
effectiveness of the curriculum. old.nas.edu/USNC-IBRO-
USCRC/activities_workshops.shtml#past.

United States and overseas, chose the theme or to any of the sciences. It often serves as the
Evidence-Based Learning and Teaching to reflect best opportunity to interest students in a
that approaches to teaching and learning should biomedical research or other life science careers.
be based on scholarly activity.36 Additionally, the According to the 2003 National Academies
IEEE International Conference on Teaching, report Bio2010: Transforming Undergraduate
Assessment, and Learning for Engineering Education for Future Research Biologists,
(TALE) is held each year in the Asia-Pacific however, teaching practices have not kept pace
region and complements the Frontiers in North with advances in scientific research about
America and the EDUCON in Europe/Middle learning (NRC, 2003). Consequently, the
East/Africa conferences.37 At the primary and gateway through which most students pass is
secondary level, IAP–The Global Network of antiquated, misrepresents the interdisciplinary,
Science Academies, has promoted what it calls collaborative, evidence-based culture of science,
“Inquiry-Based Science Education” since 2001 and fails to implement current knowledge about
through activities led by the Chilean Academy of how people learn. Bio2010 identified faculty
Sciences.38 The next section describes the model development as a crucial component in
used for the project that is the subject of this improving undergraduate biology education and
report. the authoring committee suggested the
development of a “Summer Institute” to bring
life sciences faculty together to work on
PUTTING RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE39 improving education. This Summer Institute
would focus on integrating current scientific
Introductory science courses at large universities research and appropriate pedagogical
in the United States serve as the portals that approaches to create courses that actively engage
connect undergraduates to frontiers in research students in the ways that scientists think. The
and scientific ways of thinking. An introductory committee further recognized the need for
undergraduate biology course might be the only ongoing reinforcement of teacher development
exposure many students have to the life sciences, and the benefits of interactive activities to
produce participants who would be fully able to
use their new pedagogy and content knowledge
36
For further information, see http://cml.esc.edu /node/629. effectively.
37
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, a
professional association headquartered in New York City
with more than 400,000 members in more than 160 Characteristics of Faculty Development
countries, now uses IEEE for everything but formal, legal Programs
matters. For further information, see www.tale-
conference.org/ tale2013/venue.php.
38
Over the years, dozens of programs across all the
For further information, see www.
interacademies.net/Activities/Projects/12250.aspx. STEM disciplines have been implemented to
39
A version of the text in this section appeared in the letter build the capacity of faculty to teach effectively.
report of the planning meeting for this project, Research in They are a subset of the more general category of
the Life Sciences with Dual Use Potential: An International “train-the-trainer” programs in which more
Faculty Development Project on Education about the
Responsible Conduct of Science (NRC 2011e:14-19). The
experienced educators seek to impart knowledge
material has been lightly edited and updated to reflect or skills in a way that can be sustained after the
developments since the meeting. The section entitled initial encounter. The newest programs, such as
“Characteristics of Faculty Development Programs” is new some of those described in this report, draw on
material prepared for this report.

the science of learning to inform the faculty they will need to make in their own
development programs themselves, infusing the classrooms.
workshops/meetings/ institutes with active  …all of the program leaders recognize that a
learning principles and practices. A report one-time workshop is unlikely to produce the
released in 2013 on The Role of Scientific kind of expert teaching competence required
Societies in STEM Faculty Workshops (Hilborn, of an effective instructor. The programs use a
2013), for example, provides descriptions and variety of mechanisms to continue interactions
initial assessments of a number of programs run among the participants (peer mentoring and
coaching) and with the program leaders.
by major U.S. professional societies. Although
(Hilborn, 2013:6-9)
the programs vary in terms of a number of
features, such as their target audiences (e.g.,
Together, these and other programs offer a
junior versus senior faculty, type of institution),
number of different models for undertaking
length (e.g., from a weekend to a week to 10
faculty development.
days), and location (e.g., standalone or as part of
a professional society meeting), they also share a
One Model in Detail: The National Academies
number of major characteristics.
Summer Institutes in Undergraduate
 Simply stated, the goals of all the STEM faculty Education in Biology (NASI)
programs discussed here are to develop expert
competence in teaching, to enhance faculty One substantive result of the recommendation
views of teaching as a scholarly activity, and to in BIO2010 was the development of the annual
promote the use of evidence in evaluating the National Academies Summer Institute for
effectiveness of teaching practices. Undergraduate Biology Education (NASI).40
 All of the initiatives promote, either explicitly This institute is designed to model the scientific
or implicitly, the importance of “scientific teaching principles on which it is founded and
teaching.” draws on the expertise of both participants and
 The meetings generally consist of a mix of presenters.
plenary sessions, often carried out with NASI provides a venue each year for teams
interactive engagement techniques—to model of faculty from primarily research-intensive
what the leaders hope the participants will universities to meet for five days of in-depth
implement in their home institutions—and discussions, demonstrations, and working
smaller breakout and discussion sessions. sessions on research-based approaches to
 While many effective pedagogical practices cut
undergraduate biology education. The idea is to
across disciplines, their effective
generate the same atmosphere as a Gordon
implementation requires broad knowledge of
Conference or a Cold Spring Harbor research
the discipline and its modes of discussion and
course, but with the topics being issues in
argument. Hence, all of the programs
education rather than, for instance,
described here have the participants think
bacteriophage genetics. Current research in
about (and in some cases practice) effective
pedagogical methods within the context of the effective pedagogical practices in undergraduate
discipline. This method builds on the content science education, active learning, assessment,
knowledge of the participants and prepares
them more directly for the teaching decisions 40
For additional information see
http://academiessummerinstitute.org and an article by
Pfund et al. (2009).

and diversity are woven throughout the week, to teaching and student learning will continue to
creating a forum for participants to share ideas be collected and analyzed.
and develop innovative instructional materials Participants at the Madison NASI were
that they are expected to implement when they selected based on a rigorous application process
return to their own campuses. overseen by a National Academies committee;
Initiated with a pilot institute in 2003, NASI applications for the regional institutes are
convened annually during the last week of June monitored by the local organizing committees
on the campus of the University of Wisconsin, using similar criteria. There is a particular
Madison from 2004 to 2011. The target emphasis on including pretenured as well as
audiences have been faculty and academic senior faculty as members of the team. NASI
leaders from universities where large courses, also trains a cadre of mentor/facilitators who
especially at the beginners’ level for both life work with participating teams each summer.
sciences majors and for students with other Many of these facilitators are NASI alumni,
career goals, provide significant impediments to selected for this honor based on observations of
reform. Most universities have sent a team of 2-3 their performance during the institute they
people to one institute. Others have sent attended.
multiple teams (of different people each year) Although an individual regional institute
over two or more years. NASI has been may reorganize the schedule to some extent,
supported primarily through funding from the each institute typically consists of a series of
Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI; plenary sessions in the mornings and facilitated
through summer 2011) with additional support small group activities during the afternoons. All
from Research Corporation for Scientific plenary sessions model the kinds of evidence-
Advancement and the Burroughs Wellcome based active teaching and learning that the
Fund. Institute stresses for improving undergraduate
Based on NASI’s success, HHMI provided a education. Topics include subjects such as active
new award to the program that has enabled its teaching, how people learn, formative and
expansion to up to eight institutes each year in summative assessment, teaching to diverse
regions across the United States. Four regional student populations, mentoring, and working
institutes were organized in 2011, seven in 2012, with colleagues to improve teaching and
and another seven in 2013.41 These regional learning.
institutes adhere to the structure and emphasis Each small group typically consists of
of the Madison NASI but also expand the pool of participants from three university teams and
educators beyond faculty in research-intensive focuses on producing a “teachable tidbit” in
universities, participants (e.g., graduate students some broad area of biology or interconnected
and postdoctoral fellows in addition to junior disciplines (e.g. biology/chemistry,
and senior faculty), and areas of expertise biology/mathematics). A tidbit is a module that
(beyond a primary focus on the biological integrates aspects of classroom, laboratory, or
sciences). Data about the participants in these field experiences, assessment, and techniques to
institutes and how they change their approaches help diverse student populations learn more
effectively. Small groups are given time to
interact with each other during the week to
41
Links to general information about the regional institutes critique each other’s tidbits as they are
and the dates and locations of regional institutes in a given developed. Each team then presents its “tidbit”
year are available at http://academiessummerinstitute.org.

on the next-to-last day. Each tidbit is peer- From its inception, NASI has also been a
reviewed by other participants, facilitators, and research project. Self-reported data from
members of the organizing committee. participants are collected and analyzed regularly
All resources and products of each NASI are to determine the impact of this initiative (e.g.,
collected on an Academies portal and made Pfund et al., 2009). In addition, HHMI sponsors
available to all participants, current and a midyear meeting for one representative from
previous. each university team approximately 6 months
Over the course of the NASI program (2004- after their NASI participation to measure
2012) 710 people have participated from 167 success, challenges, and new activities that have
institutions in 46 states and the District of emerged from their participation. The data and
Columbia. Because so many of these participants information gained are used in a constant
serve as instructors in large lecture-style courses, process of adjustments and iterations to improve
collectively they have taught more than 250,000 the NASI; the current version bears only a
undergraduates. modest resemblance to the original institutes.
The National Academies recognizes the This commitment to continuous assessment and
commitment of these participants by naming adjustment as needed for faculty and students as
each an “Education Fellow in the Life Sciences” well as courses and programs is another
for the year following their attendance at NASI. hallmark of active learning. Chapter 4 describes
Participants also identify key academic leaders how the lessons of active learning and the NASI
on their campuses who are notified about the approach and experience were applied to new
honor. material in a new setting.


Chapter 4
The Institute
This chapter describes the preparations for and THE PLANNING MEETING AND PILOT
activities during the Educational Institute for
Responsible Research on Infectious Diseases: The original development of NASI included a
Ensuring Safe Science in the 21st Century pilot test of the design. Plans for a similar,
(hereafter, the Institute), which was held in smaller-scale pilot were included in the grant for
Aqaba, Jordan, in September 2012. As discussed the Middle East–North Africa (MENA) project.
briefly in earlier chapters, the Institute applies a The insights from the pilot, carried out as part of
model developed by the U.S. National the planning meeting held at TWAS in Trieste,
Academies (the National Academies Summer Italy, in early June 2011, were essential to the
Institutes in Undergraduate Biology Education, development of the Institute. Experts from
or NASI) to use active learning methods to Europe, the United States, Egypt, and South
improve the quality of undergraduate biology Africa joined the members of the National
education to the challenges of creating networks Academies committee overseeing the project.42
of faculty able to teach about dual use issues in The Trieste meeting built on the Warsaw
the context of responsible conduct of science. workshop’s strong emphasis on active learning
The choice of NASI as the model from among approaches to teaching and the inclusion of
the many available approaches to faculty experts in pedagogy along with experts in dual
development programs (see Chapter 3) reflects use issues, responsible conduct of research, and
the knowledge and experience that the various fields of relevant life sciences research
Academies have accumulated in a decade of (NRC, 2011c). The initial discussion of the
conducting them, the data that the project has project’s goals and fundamental concepts
collected and continues to collect about its focused on dual use and responsible conduct of
efficacy (e.g., Pfund et al., 2009), and the fact research and was followed by examples of
that some members of the Institute’s organizing general life sciences education, as well as “train-
committee were selected because of their the-trainer” programs that make use of active
leadership in NASI to get the project off the learning methods. In addition to discussions,
ground. The project is a collaboration among the attendees had a chance to engage actively with
National Academies, the Bibliotheca some of the methods themselves. In particular,
Alexandrina, and The World Academy of small groups of attendees were given the task of
Sciences (TWAS). The material in this chapter setting general goals and specific learning
on active learning methods provides an objectives for the Institute. The results of the
opportunity to show how the concepts
introduced in Chapter 3 can be presented and
42
applied in an actual learning situation. The list of planning meeting participants is shown in a
2011 letter report (NRC 2011e).
39

small groups’ deliberations provided the letter report also includes discussions of the
foundation for the final day’s general discussion detailed lessons that the meeting provided for
of next steps, which served as the basis for the the design of the Institute. That text is provided
committee’s conclusions about the overall in Appendix C. The actual work of designing the
design of the Institute, which were presented in a Institute is described in the next section.
letter report (NRC, 2011e). The conclusions
were intended
DESIGNING THE INSTITUTE
to serve as global guidelines applicable…to any
country wishing to adopt this educational The design of the Institute followed the steps
model that combines principles of active outlined in the planning meeting in Trieste and
learning and training with attention to norms described in the letter report. The committee
of responsible science. It aims to address the members formed three subgroups to (1) design
unmet need of respectfully incorporating into the content, (2) develop the pedagogy, and (3)
existing science teaching and research
review and evaluate the applications from
(especially in the field of emerging infectious
prospective participants. The content and
diseases) the ideas of conducting science
pedagogical elements were chosen to support the
responsibly, of cultivating a culture of
implementation of the Institute’s goals as
laboratory safety, and of raising awareness
formulated in Trieste to cultivate future leaders
within the local scientific community of the
consequences of misusing research with dual
in responsible science and research integrity
use potential (NSABB, 2008; NRC 2009c). (NRC, 2011e:17). For participants unfamiliar
(NRC, 2011e:10) with the ethical and legal responsibilities of
physical and life scientists or issues in the
Five general considerations were identified responsible conduct of science, the Institute
to frame the Institute: would provide an introduction. For those who
had experience with these topics, the Institute
 Responsible conduct of research/research would provide an opportunity to gain a deeper
integrity as core themes. appreciation and share their insights. Since
 The importance of respecting and adapting to science faculty in many parts of the world
the national context of the workshops’ host receive little formal training in teaching or
countries. knowledge of the emerging scientific research on
 The advantages of the science of learning and human learning and cognition that can help to
scientific teaching approach. improve pedagogy (e.g., NRC, 2000), the
 The value of creating networks of faculty and committee anticipated that participants’
institutional support for the sustainability of familiarity and experience with active learning
efforts. techniques would be equally varied. The
 Essential role of assessment and evaluation. committee believed it was important to provide
(NRC, 2011e:12-14) some of the basics of best teaching practices, as
supported by cognitive science and discipline-
The full text of the conclusions is worth based education research, in addition to the
quoting at length (see Box 4-1) because of their scientific and ethical aspects of responsible
influence on the development and science. To help Institute participants better
implementation of the project’s next phases. The understand elements of responsible conduct of

The Institute 41
research (RCR), responsible science (RS), and taught, what they each hoped to achieve by
best practices in pedagogy, the committee attending the Institute, and their contributions
created pairs of content and active learning to science. The application is shown in
techniques. Definitions of these techniques are Appendix G. A total of 56 applications from
provided in the Glossary; further descriptions of qualified individuals were received. Of those, the
the active learning techniques with examples staff in consultation with the committee selected
from biology of how they can be applied are 32 participants, 28 of whom attended.
shown in Table 3-1, and additional resources are The Institute in Aqaba was attended by a cross-
in Appendix D. section of individuals from the MENA region:
The Schedule at a Glance (Figure 4-1) shows Algeria (4), Egypt (14), Jordan (3), Libya (1), and
the thematic and chronological architecture of Yemen (6), of whom 8 were women and 11 were
the Institute, which emulates the design of NASI. part of a team or from the same institution.
A facilitator-training day preceded the initiation Based on the experience of NASI, teams were
of the Institute. Over the course of 5½ days, the encouraged to include at least one senior faculty
participants took part in morning member. The list of participants and their
content/pedagogy sessions and spent the affiliations is in Appendix F.
afternoons and evenings in small groups to
develop teaching modules based on selected Facilitator Preparation
topics and using active learning tools. These
modules were presented to, and discussed by, An integral aspect of NASI is the preparation of
the faculty and participants. On the last day, the its facilitators and frequent opportunities for
participants met together by country and them to work together each day to address
presented their ideas for implementing the problems and develop solutions to those
Institute’s content and pedagogy in their home problems collectively. Initial preparation of
institutions and countries to everyone attending facilitators takes place the day preceding each
the Institute. NASI. The preparation sessions help new
facilitators recognize the difference between
Recruitment of Participants teaching and facilitation and allow them to
practice strategies to maintain their roles as
A crucial action identified at the planning facilitators rather than educators (Table 4-1). As
meeting at TWAS was the need to engage early with all aspects of NASI, facilitator preparation
in strategic discussions about supporting the draws on findings from the sociological and
cohort of participants in the Institute upon their organizational research literature on group
return to their home institutions (NRC, dynamics. Introducing facilitators to this body of
2011e:15). Using the extensive communication work, which focuses on various stages of group
networks of the Bibliotheca Alexandrina as well formation and cohesion (e.g., Tuckman, 1965;
as its experience in managing competitive Richards and Moger, 1999; Stetson, 2009) and
application processes, teams of participants from encourages them to share this information with
different MENA countries were invited to apply. the members of their groups, can help individual
In addition to their academic accomplishments, group members recognize their strengths and
applicants were judged on the basis of a personal weaknesses associated with group work.
statement, which elaborated their individual Recognizing these factors can, in turn, help
teaching philosophy, the types of courses they participants to better facilitate group situations


BOX 4-1
Conclusions from the Planning Meetinga
Responsible conduct of research/research integrity as core themes. Building on a prominent theme

from the Warsaw workshop and other NRC reports about education related to dual use issues (NRC,
2004, 2009b, 2011c), broader principles of responsible conduct and research integrity rather than the
“dual use” theme were chosen as the foundation for faculty development. By embedding the EPI
[Egyptian Prototype Institute] in general discussions on professional conduct, participants accepted the
idea that this more general approach would likely be more enduring and sustainable than focusing only
on dual use issues. It also resonated with the participants from Egypt for whom a more comprehensive
framework beyond research with dangerous pathogens is a more realistic educational opportunity. Such
an inclusive approach would also enable future workshops to take advantage of other initiatives….
Importance of respecting and adapting to the national context of workshop host countries. One of the
insights from earlier efforts to develop education programs on responsible conduct of science and dual
use issues is the wide variation in higher education structure and process, and national education policy
and how those differences could affect the design and implementation of programs (NRC, 2011c; Rappert,
2010).
 The difficulty of introducing new material, especially beyond core science topics, into crowded
curricula is a common concern among nations. In some countries introducing entire new courses
into existing curricula can have a direct impact on the development and implementation of
faculty networks both at an institutional and national level and efforts to develop nationwide
approaches may be difficult. In some countries where institutions of higher education are largely
autonomous (e.g., the United States), development of new courses can essentially result from an
instructor’s initiative, with only limited approval needed from immediate supervisors. In nations
with a centralized ministry of higher education (e.g., Egypt) a new course could require approval
by national authorities, an often lengthy process.
 One of the most sensitive areas for teaching about dual use and related issues is the political and
historical context of different countries, which in some cases may make faculty reluctant to
become involved in anything associated with “security.” This supports the point already made
above about the advantages of embedding dual use issues within the broader framework of
responsible conduct. It also may affect the choice of the local partners, for example,
understanding whether formal or informal endorsement by certain government or education
officials is essential or how important it might be to work with an institution that by virtue of its
prestige or connections can provide flexibility for teaching new courses for its faculty.


The Institute 43
 The importance of local context for the successful design of a faculty development program
underscores the need of a preparatory site visit(s) as part of the planning process. One outcome of
the Trieste workshop was the decision to send a small team of staff and Committee members to
Egypt to meet with local faculty, university officials, and government administrators in Fall 2011.
The purpose of these meetings is to inform university and government leaders about the planned
workshop, and acquire their active support for its successful execution, for the participation of
junior faculty, for any follow-on activities originating from the participants, and for the initiation
of a network of faculty-workshop participants who will subsequently become trainers for other
faculty and their students. An important point to discuss will be the mechanism by which the
participants will be chosen so that local mechanisms will be considered. As mentioned in the
previous bullet, the advice of well-chosen local partners is invaluable in understanding the
political sensitivities and planning a successful visit.
Advantages of a “science of learning” approach. The enthusiasm among participants for their
experience with active learning reinforced the message from the Warsaw workshop about the value of
such approaches in education about dual use and related, broader issues. The relevance of adopting such
methods for classrooms and laboratories across the world is supported by the decision by the World
Health Organization to revamp its biosafety train-the-trainer programs to adopt similar active learning
methods (WHO, 2006, 2010).
Sustainability of efforts: Value of a network approach and institutional support. As already

mentioned, a continuing challenge for efforts to promote new concepts, materials, and pedagogical
approaches is the competition for space in a crowded curriculum. It is essential that, from the beginning,
the planning for any such effort include a focus on strategies to make the project sustainable. The lessons
from efforts in many other areas reinforce the value of building networks of faculty who can share
experiences and provide mutual reinforcement (NRC 2010). For example, creating opportunities for
participants in a faculty development workshop to get together after their initial experience in
implementing what they have learned has proved extremely valuable to sustaining commitment and
momentum (Pfund et al., 2009). In a broader context, building institutional support for sustaining not
only the network but the faculty’s ability to introduce others to these concepts as well as support for both
teaching and research would help foster the culture of responsible science.
Assessment and evaluation. The “science of learning” approach emphasizes concrete goals and
continual, measurable outcomes of student performance, whether qualitative or quantitative. Effective
evaluation depends on incorporating assessment as an integral part of the follow-on activities and as such
would inform any strategies to sustain these educational efforts.
a
This text is reproduced from NRC, 2011e:12-14.


TABLE 4-1 Characteristics of effective teaching compared with effective facilitating

Effective Teaching Effective Facilitation
Emphasizes learning by individuals but also can Emphasizes collective learning.
foster collective learning.
Imparts knowledge and conceptual frameworks to Guides the processes for the development of
students. knowledge and skills.
Emphasizes new knowledge acquisition and Emphasizes processes of learning, reflection about
understanding in specific content domains but also learning, and new, deeper understanding of
helps students understand the need for reflecting preexisting knowledge from many domains (e.g.,
on their learning. personal, professional).
Teacher often serves as the knowledge expert. Knowledge and expertise are shared among the
facilitator and other learners.
Source: The table has been adapted and modified from Miller and Pfund (2011).
among their own colleagues or students, as  Respecting each member of the group and
elaborated in Table 4-1. her/his contributions. That is, effective
Given the success of these strategies and listening as well as talking, respectful
activities and the fact that most facilitators at the questioning of statements or opinions
Institute had no experience with this role, two offered by group members, nonjudgmental
members of the planning committee and one discussions and interactions.
staff member for this project, who have been  Keeping the group focused on the task at
associated with NASI many years, organized a hand. Understanding the difference between
preparatory session for all the facilitators of the relevant tangents and those that lead the
Institute. Facilitation goes beyond the use of group away from their goals and tasks.
good teaching practices and, as noted in a recent Using time thoughtfully. Although
edition of the facilitation manual that was facilitators agreed each afternoon on the
developed for NASI, “Effective facilitation is a goals and work to be accomplished the
nuanced balance of leadership and participation, following day, effective facilitators recognize
assembly and deconstruction—each of which differences in group dynamics (these
can (and should) be practiced” (Miller and differences include those between groups as
Pfund, 2011:3). Additional differences between well as those within groups that might
teaching and facilitating are described in Table develop over time as group members have
4-1. additional opportunities to interact with
In these sessions, facilitators also learned each other). In some cases, slowing down
about understanding and dealing with different the pace of work is important while in others
interpersonal relationships and conflicts that the group will be able to work more quickly
often develop among group members through than anticipated. Rigid adherence to a
the course of an Institute. These kinds of schedule that is designed prior to an
dynamics include: Institute could interfere with actual progress

FIGURE 4-1 Schedule at a Glance: Thematic and chronological structure of the Institute.


of work and group cohesion in some cases. Undergraduate Biology Education (e.g., Pfund et
 Allowing time for reflection and thought. al., 2009; Handelsman et al., 2006; Labov and
Silence among participants in a classroom or Young, 2013) introduced key topics for effective,
a group situation can appear to indicate lack evidence-based teaching practices in three
of progress or disconnect between the sessions: How People Learn, Assessment, and
facilitator and participants. However, well- Active Learning. These sessions provided a
used silence can help group members clarify framework for helping Institute participants
their thinking and, sometimes, modify their transition from what cognitive science tells us
positions about a contentious issue about how people learn to practical applications
particularly prompted by group discussions. for development of instructional material for the
The effective facilitator builds silent periods classroom and measurement of students’
into group sessions and tells participants the learning gains. A number of examples,
purposes for such periods. resources, and references related to active
 Taking care to avoid becoming a participant. learning are provided in Appendix D.
When there are lulls in conversation or As in all sessions at the Institute, those
lapses of progress, it sometimes feels easier making presentations and those facilitating
for facilitators to assume some of the roles discussions actively engaged participants in what
and responsibilities of participants. was being taught and gave them practice with
Facilitators need to provide guidance and active learning and reflection. These themes
structure without taking over the group’s were modeled not only in the pedagogy sessions
agenda or its distribution of work. Indeed, if but also in each of the content sessions so that
the group is progressing well in meeting its participants could immediately apply the skills
goals and plan of work, facilitators also need being taught during both types of sessions. This
to recognize when to leave the group on its format also helped participants to better
own. An effective group will need its incorporate these concepts and skills into the
facilitator less and less as the Institute modules they were creating, providing an
progresses. environment where they could be both iterative
and reflective about their learning (this kind of
A number of publications are available to self-analysis of one’s learning is termed
assist those who wish to replicate this type of “metacognition”; NRC, 2000).
facilitator training in their home institutions as
part of a “train-the-trainer” program (see, for
example, Branchaw et al., 2010:257-260; Pfund Session 1: How People Learn
et al., 2012). The first session, How People Learn, introduced
participants to the essential findings from meta-
analyses of the cognitive science literature,
THE INSTITUTE ITSELF providing a rationale for why faculty should
view teaching science differently than traditional
Pedagogy Sessions norms and practices (NRC, 2012a). The goals of
the session were to provide participants with a
Throughout the week-long Institute, presenters pedagogical framework for creating their RCR
who have been involved with the National modules and for improving their teaching. The
Academies Summer Institutes for session highlighted that all learners come to the

The Institute 47
learning process with life experiences and given that much less information is now vetted
preconceptions that often can lead to conceptual through trusted sources than previously.43
barriers to learning scientific concepts that are Instructors can also help students become
frequently non- or even counterintuitive, and more effective learners through reflection on
that for any discipline we need to help the their own learning and development of a
learner develop metacognitive skills and a conceptual framework for science (NRC, 2000).
conceptual framework for organizing Providing learners with opportunities to review
information (content) and putting it in the their learning progress is an important aspect of
context of other information. the learning process. It is also critical to help
Given that life experiences impact how learners develop a conceptual framework,
people approach learning, it is important to view particularly through the practice of science, so
learners based on their worlds, rather than those they can more readily incorporate new content.
of the instructors. For this reason, presenters Likewise, throughout the Institute the facilitator
addressed how college students (undergraduates team challenged participants’ own
and graduate) today are different from when misconceptions, helped them reflect on their
most of the participants were in college. For learning, and provided a pedagogical framework
example, the world is more globalized and for developing modules.
information comes almost instantaneously from The tenets of scientific teaching are that
the Internet and through cell phones, which are teaching science should be done with the same
relatively new modes of communication. In the rigor, creativity, and general methodological
United States, the so-called Millennial approaches that one would apply to research,
Generation faces different challenges from those including the process of discovery (Handelsman,
of the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, and 2004). For example, when undertaking new
these differences matter when it comes to their research, scientists always search the literature to
approaches to learning. Therefore, faculty determine what is known about the subject, the
should be aware of these differences and provide methodologies used to investigate it, and how
learning experiences that are well suited for they can build on that body of knowledge. They
these students. For example, spending time in develop hypotheses and design experiments to
class to provide students with primary content test them frequently. When a particular
information is less necessary now than in the approach proves untenable, they redesign both
past since information is readily available the questions and approaches to addressing
anytime and anywhere. A larger issue is helping them. They share their data with other scientists
students make sense of this information, both informally and through peer-reviewed
connecting it to other kinds of information and papers. When employing scientific teaching,
concepts, recognizing and addressing naïve or similar procedures would be used to design
incorrect conceptions that they may have courses, teaching laboratories, and field
developed about some subject matter due to experiences for students.
personal experience or being taught or learning To help participants understand how to
a concept incorrectly, and helping them learn apply scientific teaching to their own
what information is bona fide and what is not, classrooms, they were provided with a structure

43
In some of the early learning literature (e.g., NRC, 2000),
ideas that are incomplete or incorrect were referred to as
“preconceptions” and “misconceptions,” respectively.


for developing educational materials and order cognitive skills (LOCS) and higher-order
learning experiences—“backward design”—that cognitive skills (HOCS) (see Figure 4-2; Crowe et
has been subjected to significant research to al., 2008; Zoller, 1993). The lessons learned in
determine its efficacy (Wiggins and McTighe, this session helped participants to reflect on the
1998). Most traditional forms of teaching start use of assessment in their teaching and were
by the instructor first designing the syllabus, immediately applied to the modules they were
selecting the text, and creating teaching creating.
materials, followed by construction of The main difference between summative
assessments. Although this approach may seem and formative assessments is that summative
reasonable and is currently widely used by assessment is the endpoint of measuring
postsecondary faculty, it is mostly instructor- learning and formative assessment is
centered as the learning objectives and measurement of learning throughout the
assessment of those objectives (exam questions) learning process (Handelsman et al., 2007).
were designed after the teaching was complete. Examinations (summative assessments) are the
A more student-centered approach is to clearly products of learning whereas assessments during
state all measurable learning objectives and write learning (formative assessments) can help guide
associated assessments prior to instruction so the instructor and learners to change their
that instruction is based on that template, practices and strategies for teaching and
keeping learners at the front and center of learning, respectively. Summative assessments
course development and the teaching process. can be given in many forms (exams, written
The concepts promoted during this session papers, final presentations or some other form of
laid the foundation for how the Institute work). Formative assessments can include
participants would develop their modules each techniques such as short quizzes at the
day, and illustrated how they could change their beginning or the end of class sessions for which
teaching practices on their own campuses. students receive a few or no points, or questions
during class where students can state their
Session 2: Assessment answers using flash cards that they hold up or
The second session, Assessment, introduced through the use of electronic response systems
participants to new ways of thinking about (also known as “clickers”).
assessment and how it can be used to improve Because summative assessments are high- stakes
learning as well as to measure learning gains. for the learner, they drive learning and therefore
Presenters began this session with a discussion can be powerful learning tools. The first part of
of the differences between summative and the session stressed how educational materials,
formative assessments and how these fit into including the modules that participants would
theframework of backward design. Throughout develop during the Institute, should be designed
the session the presenters emphasized the in ways that best guide the learner through the
importance of articulating clear, measurable learning process, and that the instructor’s
learning objectives for both guiding teaching intentions and expectations for assessments
and material development and enhancing should be stated at the outset.
learning. Hands-on activities allowed A clear statement of what learners should
participants to practice writing measurable know or be able to do (learning objectives)
learning objectives at different levels—what are before they are taught the material can help
referred to in the research literature as lower- guide them in the learning process, particularly

The Institute 49
Cognitive Bloom Level

Level A Simple Phrase to Guide Categorization
HOC Evaluate
“Defend or judge a concept or idea”
Synthesize
“Create something new”
Analyze
“Distinguish parts and make inferences”
LOC/HOC Apply
“Use information or concepts in new ways”
LOC Comprehend
“Explain information or concepts”
Know
“Recall information”
FIGURE 4-2 Bloom’s Taxonomy and Cognitive Levels. HOC, higher-order cognitive skills; LOC, lower-order cognitive skills. The
original levels of cognition proposed in 1956 have been modified by others. For example, Overbough and Schultz
(http://ww2.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Bloom/blooms_taxonomy.htm, date unknown) have proposed the following descriptors
ranging from the lowest to highest levels: Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analyzing, Evaluating, Creating. Additional
sources of information about these modifications to Bloom’s Taxonomy are available through links on the website by Overbough
and Schultz. SOURCE: Created by the committee.
if they understand that the learning objectives challenge level of the content practiced and
are tied to summative assessments. Instructors tested. Bloom’s Taxonomy of Education
can use the framework of backward design not Objectives Handbook I: Cognitive Domain is a
only to align the content of their formative and classification system to distinguish six categories
summative assessments but also to adjust the (see Figure 4-2) or levels of human cognition
cognitive levels at which the learner is engaged and has been effectively used for over 50 years to
during learning and testing. Around any content develop curricula (Bloom, 1956). As mentioned
area, the instructor’s learning objectives can be above, one of the most useful distinctions lies
directly tied to, and aligned with, both not in the differences among the six categories
summative and formative assessments. To this but rather in the difference between categories
end, participants engaged in a series of activities that require higher-order cognitive (HOC) and
that allowed them to practice aligning lower-order cognitive (LOC) skills (Zoller,
summative and formative assessments so that 1993). Simplifying the taxonomy into two
they could better understand the relationships groups helps one to quickly assess how
between these two important aspects of learning. challenging the learning objectives and
An important aspect of aligning summative assessments will be to the learner (Crowe et al.,
and formative assessments is that both the 2008). After introducing this concept,
content and the cognitive level at which the participants learned to categorize questions and
learner must work should be taken into activities based on Bloom’s Taxonomy.
consideration. Most instructors find it fairly easy During this session of the Institute,
to align what they teach with what will be on the participants focused on the importance of
test, but a more difficult task is aligning the assessment and how different forms of


assessment are related to teaching and learning. problem, which they first considered
The presentation and discussion centered on independently, followed by group discussion.
backward design as a way to align content and The process was repeated until the larger group
Bloom’s Taxonomy to help evaluate how content was able to correctly solve the problem. Through
and cognitive levels could be incorporated into this method, participants learned the importance
the modules that participants would develop of group work in problem solving, i.e., that
during the small group work in the afternoons learners can often help themselves and others
and evenings (see below). with whom they interact to learn independently
from their instructors, but also how difficult it
Session 3: Active Learning can be for some to overcome their
The Active Learning session emphasized how misconceptions. By illustrating how active
faculty can transition from an instructor- learning not only engages the learner but also
centered to learner-centered approaches using a helps creates cognitive dissonance for those with
repertoire of techniques for engaging learners misconceptions, participants were shown the
(see Table 3-1). Active learners take value of active learning and brought this
responsibility for their learning by participating understanding to their module development.
in problem solving, group work, or related During this session, presenters also shared
activities that engage them in the learning the wealth of data from the literature on science,
process and help them construct their technology, engineering, and mathematics
knowledge. With a “toolbox” of active learning (STEM) education that supports the
techniques that were provided during these effectiveness of these methods and demonstrates
sessions, Institute participants were assisted in their use for enhancing learning. Scientists are
developing RCR modules that incorporate receptive to changing or refining their views
evidence-based best practices in pedagogy that based on evidence. An increasing amount of
they would use themselves and disseminate to data from rigorous studies shows that active
their colleagues. learning helps more students succeed
An important aspect of this session was to academically in the science disciplines.
help participants realize that all learners, Presentation and discussion of this evidence
including themselves, have preconceptions or helped foster the participants’ understanding
misconceptions about content and that those that these methods work and that faculty should
misconceptions need to be addressed for not approach teaching and learning based on
successful learning.44 An effective method for traditional norms and practices but rather
teaching this concept was to model how through actively engaging learners throughout
formative assessment and active learning can the learning process, assisting them in
uncover common misconceptions in science. developing lifelong learning and collaborative
Therefore, the presenters designed activities that skills.
would engage participants in the ways that An important part of this pedagogy session
students are often challenged when learning new was to model the many ways in which active
scientific concepts. Participants were given a learning can be implemented. Throughout the
content and pedagogy sessions the Institute

44
There is an emerging literature on misconceptions in engaged participants in a variety of ways and
many fields of science. For example, for misconceptions made learning objectives for each session
about various aspects of biology, see Coley and Tanner transparent so that the participants could
(2012).

The Institute 51
practice aligning learning objectives with in the content to be discussed during the
formative and summative assessments in Institute worked closely with the committee with
multiple ways. Presenters were explicit and expertise in science education and pedagogy for
reflective about the methods used, and weeks prior to the Institute to plan active
throughout the week this transparency, learning pedagogies for integration into the
openness, and willingness to engage participants actual Institute sessions.
with their own learning helped them better
Theme 1: The development of professionalism
understand how to use a wide variety of active
in science. Discussion and analysis focused on
learning techniques in their own teaching. This
the development of professionalism and the role
session also summarized the third step in using
of government regulations and institutional
backward design in that participants then added
policies. The session introduced elements of
to their modules the ways in which they would
research misconduct using the case study Autism
engage the learning in connecting with the
and the MMR vaccine.
content the module was designed to deliver.
Theme 2: Conducting research responsibly.
Discussion and analysis included working with
Content Sessions and protecting human subjects, humane and
ethical care and use of laboratory animals,
Following the planning meeting in Trieste, the conflict of interest, and data management. The
content group discussed how to organize the case studies were Introducing viruses in the field
workshop around the responsible conduct of and The Guatemala syphilis studies.
research topics suggested by the National Theme 3: Being part of the responsible scientific
Institutes of Health (NIH, 2009) and expand community. Discussion began with the topics of
them to include a discussion of research with collaborative research, authorship and
dual use potential. That discussion led to the publication, and peer review using the case
three themes that were the focus of the content studies The Darsee affair and Who is an author?
sessions of the Institute. Those themes dealt with Additional discussion focused on mentor and
one’s obligations to be responsible scientists in trainee responsibilities; research with dual use
one’s daily professional life, to conduct research potential using the slide presentation Potential
responsibly, and to be a member of a threats from biotechnology and life sciences:
community of responsible scientists. The three What is dual use research?; and biosafety
themes and included topics are presented below. concerns in research through the case Studies in
Most topics were covered under more than one H5N1 influenza virulence.
theme. The cases were constructed or adapted
around themes with universal recognition that
affect scientists in similar ways regardless of Pathways and Inspirations: A Conversation
country of residence. Specific cases, also
with Institute Participants About Being a
summarized in the section below, were chosen to
Scientist
emphasize one or more of the topics in each
theme. Background readings for the cases were
The first day of the Institute began with a
available to the participants on a password-
conversation about the professional
protected website before the Institute.
commitments that had brought both
Importantly, committee members with expertise


facilitators45 and participants to the Institute and surrounding the purported causative
the meanings that theyhave found in our relationship between autism and the MMR
respective pathways in science. Three of the vaccine in children. In 1998, Andrew Wakefield
Institute faculty, Nancy Connell, Alastair Hay, and colleagues published a paper in the Lancet
and Elizabeth Heitman, recounted personal titled “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-
stories of their careers, reflecting on the specific colitis, and pervasive developmental
struggles, successes, and surprises they have disorder in children.” His hypothesis was that
encountered. Participants were then asked to the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine
pair with a new colleague to learn how the other causes a series of events that lead to the
had become interested in science, the context development of autism. In support of his
and scope of his or her current work, and the hypothesis, Wakefield described 12 children
particular points along the way at which he or with neurodevelopmental delay (8 with autism).
she found professional and personal meaning. All of these children were reported to have had
Each participant then stood and publicly gastrointestinal complaints and to develop
introduced the new colleague to the larger autism within 1 month of receiving MMR. But
group, focusing on the information or there were a number of critical flaws in the
experiences that seemed most important or experimental design and conduct of the reported
characteristic of that person. study and the paper was eventually retracted.
Three common themes emerged from the However, equally serious issues were those of
introductions: the sense of calling that many research fraud, unethical treatment of vulnerable
scientists experienced first as students that often children, and conflicts of interest.
continued throughout their careers; the This case ultimately resulted in greatly
experience that unforeseeable events had often reduced numbers of children receiving life-
been crucial to participants’ research focus and saving vaccines and untold anxiety for parents
career trajectories; and the ability of strangers making decisions about their children’s health
from different institutions and different care. By falsely linking autism to vaccines,
disciplines to find common ground in their Wakefield created an international crisis in
stories of science. This exercise, in addition to preventive medicine. This case was chosen
initiating participants into the processes of active because it demonstrates a number of important
learning, demonstrated the broader meaning of concepts and principles regarding
the concept of “scientific community” on which professionalism, including the
the Institute was built.
 importance of data selection and
46
Case 1: Autism and the MMR vaccine presentation to research integrity,
Consideration of Theme 1, Development of  importance of disclosing financial conflicts
Professionalism in Science, was facilitated by a of interest on research ethics,
discussion and analysis of the controversy  responsibilities of coauthors for study design
and interpretation,
 appropriateness of presenting research
45
The terms facilitator and institute faculty are used
findings in press conferences,
interchangeably in this report.
46
Original case developed for the Institute. The background  ethical concerns that can arise when
readings for this case were Wakefield et al. (1998) and conducting research with children,
Horton (2004). Additional readings include Deer
(2011a,b,c) and Pilonis (2007).

The Institute 53
 importance of revealing study sponsors to has been established for behavioral research
participants in human trials and studies 20 years earlier on an island near Puerto
institutional review boards, and Rico. The colony receives daily food
 potential impact of research impropriety. supplementation by boat. The research plan is to
inject one of the dominant males with wild-type
The active learning strategy chosen for this HCV and to vaccinate half of the remaining
session was large group discussion of the case, animals, both males and females, with a live
where the facilitator presented the case and then recombinant virus vaccine. All chimpanzees are
encouraged the participants to contribute to the to be monitored for the development of viremia,
discussion of the topic. This technique was immune responses to the virus, altered liver
appropriate for the first session of the workshop function, and chronic infection. An additional
since many of the participants were somewhat protocol will use the animals that become
familiar with the circumstances surrounding the infected for a clinical trial of new
case and how to approach case studies as a chemotherapeutic agents. Chimpanzees were
learning tool. selected because, like many humans, they have
multiple sexual partners and are susceptible to
Case 2: Introducing viruses in the field47 the virus. Since HCV naturally infects only
Theme 2 was Conducting Research Responsibly, humans and chimpanzees, the research group
and the session focused on research with animals felt that it was necessary to get a definitive
and human subjects. Specifically, the facilitators answer under field conditions before
wanted to address scientists’ responsibility in introducing live recombinant viruses into
protecting research subjects (both animals and uninfected human populations.
humans) as well as the communities in which The following questions were proposed for
the experiments are carried out. The themes of discussion:
experimental safety and animal protection were
highlighted in this approach.  What are some of the troublesome issues
The first case study concerned a associated with this set of experiments?
hypothetical proposal to test a live vaccine on a  What are the specific concerns about
population of chimpanzees living on an island. administering a live recombinant virus to
The case described the quandary of a young humans as a vaccine?
investigator whose expertise in primate biology  Is it ethically appropriate to intentionally
earned her a position on the animal protection transmit a human virus in a setting that is
committee of her institution. She was charged not fully controlled?
with the review of a proposal to test an altered  If it was decided that the study could not be
live virus vaccine for hepatitis C (HCV) using a carried out in chimpanzees, how might it be
free-ranging chimpanzee colony. This colony designed instead for human subjects?

47
Case and questions adapted from Introducing The active learning technique used during
Viruses in the Field (National Academy of this session was similar to a “jigsaw” wherein
Engineering Online Ethics Center for Engineering individuals in a group reach consensus about a
9/10/2006; www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases/ position or gain expertise about a topic, after
HIVan.aspx. Additional background reading is which new groups are formed so that one person
available at http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/ from each original group informs the others in
ncstate/models.htm.


the new group. The facilitators used a similar studies, internationally known syphilis expert
approach in that groups discussed one of the Dr. John Cutler led U.S. and Guatemalan
four questions above, came to consensus, and researchers in experiments designed to test
then each group contributed to the larger penicillin as a prophylactic against “normal
discussion. The general consensus of the exposure” to syphilis. Between 1946 and 1948,
participants was that the experiments should not Dr. Cutler’s group paid syphilis-infected
be allowed to go forward, citing safety and Guatemalan sex workers to have sex with
concerns about release of infectious virus. There uninfected prison inmates to measure rates of
was a lively discussion of the challenges of transmission. Additionally, some uninfected
developing animal models for human disease. women had syphilis inoculum placed on their
The participants recognized and elaborated on cervix before they had sex with uninfected
the responsibilities of researchers for prisoners. Later, researchers conducted an
environmental and community safety. inoculation study in a Guatemalan institute for
the mentally ill. Participants who tested positive
Case 3: The Guatemala syphilis studies48 were treated with a presumed curative dose of
Continuing the theme of Conducting Research penicillin, but few were told that they were being
Responsibly, this case addressed the ethical given live doses of syphilis as part of a study.
standards of research with human subjects and Researchers acknowledged privately that this
the harm that research on infectious diseases work was ethically controversial, but many were
may cause when research participants’ interests eager “to study syphilis from the standpoint of
are made secondary to scientific goals. The case pure science.”
of U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) research Institute participants used the “think, pair,
on “normal exposure” to syphilis was chosen share” method to examine several conceptual
because it reflects many practical and ethical and practical issues, including:
challenges in today’s infectious disease research.
It also demonstrates the development of  how the scientific method shapes the risks to
comprehensive ethical standards for which research participants may be exposed,
epidemiologic research and provides a stark  how the perceived threat posed by an
example on how professional dedication to an infectious disease affects the assessment of
important scientific goal can blind researchers to risk and benefit associated with related
ethical considerations relevant to their work. research,
The case took place in the mid-1940s, when  whether intentional exposure to disease
syphilis still caused widespread death and might be acceptable in research,
disability. During this period, the USPHS  the perceived advantages of undertaking
explored various uses of penicillin in preventing infectious disease research in developing
and treating syphilis in populations where it was countries, and
reported to be endemic. In one such series of  the perceived advantages and risks of
international collaboration for researchers
from developing countries with those from
48
Original study developed for the Institute. The
more scientifically developed nations.
background readings for this case were Reverby (2011),
WMA (2008), and the report of the Presidential
Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (2011). This case was unfamiliar to most Institute
(Although the full report was too long to be included, the participants. From the background reading and
preface was included and the report discussed.)

The Institute 55
discussion, participants developed knowledge of supervisors, the coauthors on his published

the practical challenges of conducting manuscripts, the institutions where he had
prevention research on serious infectious worked, the scientists who had relied on the
diseases in ways consistent with today’s ethical veracity of his research reports to shape the
standards for international infectious disease direction of their own research, and the patients
research. The group agreed that the ethical whose treatment may have been influenced by
standards of today generally protect the welfare his publications.
of human participants and safeguard the quality Some positive things have come from the
of the research results, and that this balance Darsee case. In addition to alerting scientists to
demands the researcher’s responsible conduct of the need for providing closer supervision of
science on many levels. trainees and taking authorship responsibilities
more seriously, the Darsee incident contributed
Case 4: The case against John Darsee49 to the development of guidelines and standards
To conceptualize the topics of collaborative concerning research misconduct by the USPHS,
research, authorship and publication, and peer U.S. National Institutes of Health, U.S. National
review, the case of Dr. John Darsee was used to Science Foundation, medical associations and
introduce Theme 3. Darsee was highly regarded institutes, universities, and medical schools.
as a student and medical researcher throughout This case was chosen because it
his undergraduate and postgraduate training. At demonstrates a number of important concepts
Harvard University, he worked as a research and principles related to responsibilities of
fellow in the Cardiac Research Laboratory individual scientists as members of a larger
headed by Dr. Eugene Braunwald. His special responsible scientific community, including:
area of research concerned the testing of heart
drugs on dogs. In less than two years at Harvard  ethical concerns that can arise when
he was first author on seven publications in very conducting collaborative research,
good scientific journals.  the essential responsibilities and professional
In 1981, colleagues in the Cardiac Research relationships of mentors and trainees,
Laboratory observed Darsee mislabeling data  responsibilities of authorship, and
recordings from an experiment he was  flaws in the peer review system.
performing. Over the next several months, it To engage participants, the facilitator
became clear that Darsee had been fabricating or presented the case and then each group
falsifying data for years, possibly back to his discussed the case. A spokesperson for each
undergraduate days. The consequences were group presented the group’s consensus and this
profound, not just for Darsee but for the was followed by a larger group discussion. This
members of the laboratories where he had format was appropriate for this case since many
conducted his investigations, his mentors and of the participants are academicians and the
issue of authorship responsibilities was
particularly relevant to them. There were
49
Case and questions adapted from “Case Study 1: Overly individuals in each group at various stages of
Ambitious Researchers - Fabricating Data" National
academic development, so the different
Academy of Engineering Online Ethics Center for
Engineering 7/20/2006; perspectives could be shared.
www.onlineethics.org/Education/precollege/scienceclass/secto
ne/chapt4/cs1.aspx. The background reading was Kochan
and Budd (1992). An additional reference is NAE (2007).


Case 5: Who is an author?50 each of the five groups discussed one of the
Continuing the theme of Being Part of the following and presented their position to the
Responsible Scientific Community, this case larger group:
addressed the common and often contentious
issue of the qualifications for authorship and the  the arguments for including the former
collegial responsibilities that come with research faculty member as an author and what other
publication. During the discussion, participants actions, if any, she would need to undertake
put themselves in the role of a young with this manuscript to qualify,
investigator who is preparing to submit an  the arguments against including the former
article based on a collaborative research project. faculty member as an author, and what to
The protagonist is in the sixth month of a tell the department head,
two-year research fellowship at an academic  whether to include others (the
medical center, with hopes of joining the faculty. biostatistician, resident physician, nurse,
One part of the fellow’s work is to continue a undergraduate microbiology student,
line of research originally started by a junior department head) as authors, and
faculty member who left the university to have a  the order in which to list the named authors
baby. The former faculty member is now a and the qualifications for each position.
physician in private practice. Before she left, she
designed the original protocol and collected Questions about the qualifications for
blood samples and data on 40 patients. With the authorship lead to some of the most significant
help of a former biostatistics professor, the disputes in science, and such conflict affects
research fellow revised the methodology and got many academic communities. In the
Institutional Review Board approval for a new background reading and discussion, participants
protocol. The research fellow worked with a examined the importance of assigning
resident physician and a nurse, collected blood authorship on a manuscript at the beginning of a
samples and medical histories from an collaborative project. Using the criteria for
additional 145 patients, and then analyzed the authorship from the International Committee of
samples and data from all of the samples with Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Uniform
the help of an undergraduate microbiology Requirements for Manuscripts, participants
student research assistant. The research fellow developed strategies for preventing confusion or
wrote up the manuscript and made two data conflict over authorship by agreeing on criteria
tables with the biostatistics professor. The and group expectations early in a project.
department head provided edits and helpful Most participants at the Institute were
suggestions, but also emailed the manuscript to published authors and all agreed that
the former faculty member asking for her publication—particularly in English-language
insights. She replied to the research fellow, journals—was important to their careers. A
asking to be the second author because she number of participants knew of the ICMJE’s
wanted to return to academic medicine. Uniform Requirements, and many found it
Using the modified jigsaw method of case useful to examine how they applied in specific
discussion, as described above and in Table 3-1 circumstances. Several individuals noted that
they would use these standards in their own
50
Original case developed for the Institute. The background work, particularly in discussion with superiors
readings were Albert and Wager (2003), ICMJE (2010), and and trainees.
WAME (2013).

The Institute 57
Research with Dual Use Potential  dangerous agents could be stolen or diverted
for nonpeaceful purposes.
Great achievements in molecular biology and
genetics have produced advances in science that Several examples were discussed, including
have revolutionized the practice of medicine. that any medical advance that improves the ease
The very technologies that fueled these benefits of engineering, handling, or delivery of
to society, however, pose a potential risk as treatment has the potential to be applied by
well—the possibility that these technologies those wishing to do harm and can be considered
could also be used to create the next generation “dual use,” that each year hundreds of articles on
of biological weapons. Under Theme 3, Being dual use research are published, making them
Part of the Responsible Scientific Community, accessible to any member of the research
discussion of potential threats from community, that thousands of pieces of scientific
biotechnology and life sciences was facilitated by equipment are purchased on the Internet
a PowerPoint presentation. For the purposes of without oversight or regulation, and that this
this discussion, dual use was defined as “research openness creates the risk that available
that, based on current understanding, can be information, reagents, or equipment might be
reasonably anticipated to provide knowledge, used to create new or more dangerous biological
products, or technologies that could be directly weapons.
misapplied by others to pose a threat to public The presenter used the Socratic method by
health, agriculture, plants, animals, the posing specific questions that elicited discussion.
environment, or materiel.”51 A number of types
of risk from dual-use research were discussed,  Does a select agent list make us more or less
including: safe?
 What steps can be taken to ensure that
 technologies that deliver beneficial drugs to resources/equipment/knowledge are not
the body could be used for weaponizing used inappropriately?
biological agents,  Is it a question of “Who could” or “Who
 research could have unintended would”?
consequences,
 dangerous agents could be released The active learning strategy used for this
accidentally from the lab through infected session was a presentation followed by group
personnel or other means (e.g., faulty discussion, where the facilitator reviewed the key
exhaust systems), issues, each group discussed the issues among
 research results and methods can be themselves, and then a spokesperson for each
published in easily accessible journals and group summarized the group’'s consensus. This
on the Internet, format was appropriate for this case since the
 knowledge or techniques could help to experience level of the participants varied so
create “novel” pathogens with unique widely.
properties or create entirely new classes of
threat agents, and

51
This is the definition adopted by the U.S. National
Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB, 2007). See
Box 1-1 in Chapter 1.


Case 6: Studies in H5N1 influenza virulence52 Health Organization (WHO) held an

Following on the PowerPoint-led discussion on international meeting in mid-February 2012
experiments with dual use potential, this case with 22 scientists and public health experts who
focused on two sets of highly controversial concluded that the work should be published in
experiments carried out with influenza virus full after the moratorium. At the end of March
H5N1, an avian influenza strain that has shown of the same year the NSABB voted that the two
alarming morbidity and mortality in the limited papers should be published in their entirety after
number (fewer than700) of human infections reviewing revised manuscripts and receiving
that have occurred since its identification in additional information. The papers were
1997 in Hong Kong. To discuss the experiments, published in the summer of 2012, and the flu
it was important to establish first that the researchers ended their moratorium in January
participants’ knowledge base was at a sufficient 2013.
and similar level. Therefore, the session began Before the case was presented, each group
with each group working together to standardize was asked to prepare a poster about the H5N1
their backgrounds in influenza biology. replication cycle and pathology so that those less
Afterward, a brief outline was presented to familiar with the content were informed. After
describe the series of events that led to the crisis this exercise, the case was presented and the
in H5N1 research and subsequent moratorium participants were asked to work in groups to
on continued experimentation, imposed in address the following questions representing the
January 2012. key points that this case study presents:
The controversy began when influenza
researchers announced in September 2011 at a  Why are these experiments deemed to be
flu conference in Malta that they had created dual use research of concern? Summarize
mutant forms of the H5N1 influenza virus that the experiments and discuss the possible
were transmissible between ferrets. The two nefarious uses of the information that might
research labs involved submitted manuscripts to be gained from these experiments.
the journals Science and Nature. The National  Should scientists perform the research or
Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity not?
(NSABB) of the United States was asked to  The uproar surrounding the two recent
review the two manuscripts. The NSABB H5N1 studies spotlights the issue of whether
recommended that the manuscripts be revised or not research on potentially dangerous
and published with redacted details on the lab-generated pathogens should have been
specific mutations and with additional conducted in the first place. What are the
discussion of public health values of the work, as benefits and the risks? Do the benefits
well as a description of increased safety and outweigh the risks?
security research practices. A group of leading  Should the results be published or not?
flu researchers declared a moratorium on the  Should this kind of work be regulated?
type of research that had caused the controversy  A global issue that stems from the ongoing
pending international discussion. The World H5N1 debate is how to regulate such
research. Who should be in charge of

52
Original case developed for the Institute. The background granting approval for potentially dangerous
readings for this case were Berg et al. (1975), Enserink and studies? At what biosafety level should they
Malakoff (2012), Maher (2012), Morris (2012), and Nature be conducted? Who should have access to
(2012).

The Institute 59
the full results? How should all of this be questions to address (see below). Two facilitators
organized and monitored? were assigned to each group, while two more
functioned as “floaters,” providing their
This session also used role playing as the pedagogy and content-related expertise to all the
active learning technique. Each group was groups. Each group was tasked to work
assigned a single role to play in the unfolding independently during the afternoons to develop
crisis, which led to animated debate among the teaching modules around their assigned topic
groups. The group assignments were (1) the using active learning and appropriate assessment
authors, who support and justify the research techniques; the groups’ presentations are
approach, (2) the NSABB, which initially summarized below. Each group had
opposed the publication of the experimental opportunities throughout the week to share its
details, (3) WHO, which recommended the ideas and presentations with other working
publication of the experimental details, (4) the groups and was required to make a formal
public, who were frightened and skeptical, and presentation to the entire Institute at the end of
(5) the media, which tend to use inflammatory the week. By the end of the week, each group
language to promote a story. Each group had developed a peer-reviewed, teachable unit
discussed its position and then defended its on some aspect of responsible conduct of science
position to the larger group while staying in its and had learned how to implement scientific
assigned role. teaching and mentoring workshops on their own
The learning objectives for this case touched campuses.
on many of the issues covered in other sessions,
such as the responsibility of researchers for the
safety of the environment and community in the
design of experiments. The focus of the case on Topics for the Small Working Groups
dual use allowed participants to define “dual use
research of concern” in the context of a real-life Research Misconduct
event and to explore the ethical and regulatory Misconduct is defined as fabrication,
issues related to the experiments. Finally, the falsification, or plagiarism in proposing,
participants were asked to identify the issues performing, or reviewing research, or in
surrounding the debate over publication of reporting research results. Fabrication is making
experimental details that might lead to creation up data or results and recording or reporting
of dangerous material. them. Falsification is manipulating research
materials, equipment, or processes, or changing
or omitting data or results such that the research
is not accurately represented in the research
Small Group Work
record. Plagiarism is the appropriation of
another person’s ideas, processes, results, or
As previously discussed, participants were
words without giving appropriate credit.53
assigned to five groups at the beginning of the
Research misconduct also encompasses the
Institute, so that whenever possible each group
failure to comply with legal requirements for
included participants from all countries without
protecting researchers, human and animal
overlap of participants from the same team or
subjects, and the public. It is important to
institution. Groups received brief descriptions of
their assigned topic as well as a number of
53
See http://ori.dhhs.gov/definition-misconduct.


understand that research misconduct is not an and what might prompt this, as well as what
honest mistake in reasoning, differences of would prompt individuals to plagiarize,
opinion, disagreeing with recognized authorities, fabricate, or falsify data. At the end of their
misinterpreting results, an error in planning or presentation the group posed a question to the
carrying out an experiment, or an oversight in audience, inviting them to consider ten major
attribution (ibid). reasons for misconduct and then discuss them.
Questions for Discussion Responsible Authorship

 Should other practices besides fabrication, Writing research papers is an essential activity
falsification, and plagiarism be considered for a scientific career and for the scientific
research misconduct? process. Articles are important for academic
 Is it fair to use “significant departure from recognition and authors have a responsibility to
accepted practices” to make judgments publish their results to further the scientific
about a researcher’s behavior? enterprise. But the scientific process and
 Should researchers report misconduct if they scientific publication have changed significantly
are concerned that doing so could adversely over the years. Research has become more
impact their careers? competitive, complex, and multidisciplinary,
 What evidence is needed to demonstrate with collaborations among senior scientists,
that a researcher committed misconduct clinicians, undergraduate and graduate students,
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly? technicians, postdoctoral fellows, medical
 What are appropriate penalties for different students and residents, statisticians, and other
types of misconduct? professionals in both national and international
contexts. Each brings different expectations and
Group Presentation experiences to issues such as who should be
Given that the groups were asked to plan how to included as authors in a paper for publication
teach others, most of the presentation centered and the value of their respective contributions.
around slides that defined the goals, objectives, Good scientific practices include discussions
teaching sessions, and assessment procedures to before, during, and after the research process to
be undertaken. The goal set out by the group was ensure that the allocation of authorship is
to encourage those being taught to think ethically determined, along with sound study
critically about types of misconduct and during design and attention to the protection of human
this process to discuss categories of misdeeds, subjects and the ethical use of animals.
causes and consequences, and reporting Individual journals have guidelines for authors,
strategies for communicating to others. The and the ICMJE meets regularly to update the
presentation outlined a range of assessment Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts
procedures for summative measures. These were Submitted to Biomedical Journals
aligned with various active learning approaches (www.icmje.org/index.html) to address emerging
including discussion, case studies, jigsaw issues.
approaches, and encouraging participants to
voice an opinion on questions raised during Questions for Discussion
teaching sessions, either by using clickers or  What does it mean to be an author of a
simply raising a hand. The discussions envisaged scientific paper?
by the group would cover research misconduct

The Institute 61
 What are the different positions in a list of institutions, and/or disciplines. Collaboration in
authors and what does each position signify? life sciences research is increasingly more
Why is the order of authors important? international in scope and partnerships are more
 How would you define “prior publication” and more diverse. While collaborations have
and why is this important when considering been a common characteristic of almost all
authorship? scientific inquiries for over 50 years, a number of
 What is the difference between problems can arise. Researchers have different
acknowledgment and listing as an author? styles of research, conferences, journals,
 Who takes responsibility for submission and language, ethics, standards, and schedules.
follow-up of revisions, etc.? Misunderstandings and conflicts caused by these
 What are the problems associated with using differences can lead to undue stress on the
the same data in multiple publications? group. The best way to anticipate these kinds of
 Should all authors be responsible for all of problems is to address potential conflicts before
the information in the paper? the work is begun or immediately as they arise.
 What are some of the problems that might
ensue from publishing results early, before Questions for Discussion
complete confirmation?  What are the various kinds of collaborations
about which you know?
Group Presentation  What factors drive the increase in
The presentation began with a cartoon depicting collaborative and multidisciplinary research?
a too familiar situation: a young researcher being  What are the kinds of problems that
informed that his chances of publication would collaborators face?
be augmented by having his laboratory chief as  What are some mechanisms that might
first author of the paper. The goal of the group prevent conflicts between and among
was to ensure that those being taught would gain collaborators?
a clear idea of what responsible authorship  What are the essential elements of successful
meant, why it was important to publish, and to collaboration?
understand what would motivate individuals to  How can institutions promote and support
do so. Slides were used to inform the workshop successful collaboration?
participants how the group would approach its
teaching. The group presented a case and asked Group Presentation
the workshop audience to discuss whether it was Group 3 made use of visually arresting slides to
appropriate that a certain individual be an provide some theoretical background on the
author. The participants were then asked to use meaning of collaboration before turning to the
clickers to answers six questions about who necessary goals, objectives, and teaching
might qualify as an author, ranging from those approaches. Flipcharts, clickers, handouts, and
doing laboratory work to others providing audience question and answer approaches were
statistical advice. all used to convey the message. To illustrate
collaboration further, the group presented a real-
Collaborative Science life case involving a number of countries
Collaborative science is the process of researching the antimicrobial properties of
conducting research as a team of multiple essential oil from a plant found in the
individuals across laboratories, departments, Mediterranean region, Juniperus communis.


Issues that the group identified as vital for Questions for Discussion
discussion with others included the role of each  What are some of the qualities of a great
individual in a collaborative project, the time teacher? How are these similar to and
frame, finances, potential conflicts of interest, different from the qualities of a good
and whether working with others provided any mentor?
added value. Finally, the audience was asked to  Why might a successful researcher want to
consider who ought to be first author and was be a mentor to a student just entering
invited to use clickers to address a range of science?
options.  What responsibilities do trainees have to
their research supervisors?
Mentor-Trainee Relationships and  Some universities require advisors and
Responsibilities trainees to create a written agreement about
Academic scientists traditionally have three their future work together. How can such a
interrelated and complementary roles: they document help or harm a mentoring
conduct research, they teach students, and they relationship?
provide service to society. Undergraduate-level  How might a younger researcher serve as a
teaching in science typically focuses on students’ mentor to an older scientist?
general knowledge and basic laboratory skills.  Does a researcher ever stop needing a
Graduate-level teaching is focused on the deeper mentor?
knowledge and complex abilities that trainees
need to become independent researchers. Group Presentation
Graduate programs typically assign each trainee The slide presentation by Group 4 began with an
an academic advisor and research supervisor to arresting quote to make clear that the audience
oversee their academic progress, but most would not be able just to sit back and listen to
successful young researchers can also point to speeches. Audience involvement was expected;
one or more mentors. A mentor is typically a clickers were used to collect responses. The
more senior researcher who takes special interest group noted that the issues would present many
in guiding a trainee’s development as a challenges and opportunities for conflict and
professional. The role of a mentor may vary with participants discussed some of the potential
the discipline, institution, and type of research, sources. Quality—that is, what was needed for
as well as the personalities of the mentor and good mentoring—and the responsibilities of
trainee. A trainee may also have different mentors and trainees were recurring themes.
mentors in different areas of his or her work. The group proposed using the case of a doctoral
Because faculty have a great deal of authority student whose research program became
over trainees, these relationships also hold the vulnerable through the absence of a supervisor.
potential for abuse. Problems can arise when The student persisted with the work after
faculty and trainees have different expectations various discussions with others, but the final
of their roles and responsibilities, particularly in doctoral submission was rejected by the
regards to workload and allocation of time, supervisor as inadequate. Trainees would be
authorship credit, standards of productivity, and invited to explain what steps each participant in
relationships with other faculty. the student’s program ought to have followed,
including the student himself, the supervisor, the
head of department, and the academic board.

The Institute 63
Safe Laboratory Practices: Keeping the Group Presentation

Community Safe Once again using slides, Group 5 began by
Laboratory safety is an essential feature of a explaining what safe laboratory practice is. This
responsible scientific enterprise. The was followed by the goals for its teaching
development of vaccines and other prophylactic, program. Teaching approaches would be very
diagnostic, and therapeutic interventions (e.g., “hands-on,” emphasizing rigorous attention to
antibiotics) for the treatment of infections detail, and trainees would have to understand
requires increasingly complex experimental the purpose of specific containment procedures
methods that pose complex risks. Infectious for organisms with different risk profiles.
disease research typically requires the use of Periodic assessment was envisaged for students
animals to model human disease. As the scope to test their knowledge and practice. The group
and amount of infectious disease research has introduced the case of a student who realizes
expanded, there has been an increase in the risk that the virus s/he has extracted from cells is
of laboratory-acquired infections among high-risk and categorized as a bioterrorism
research personnel. To protect their workers and agent. Again using clickers, the audience was
the surrounding community, laboratory invited to choose an answer about what the
directors must incorporate good laboratory student should do from a proffered list. As its
practices into their programs, and young parting display the group presented a small play
scientists must be trained in laboratory safety. in the form of a silent movie. With a facilitator
Global efforts to create a code of conduct for life narrating, a group member spilled an unknown
scientists have tried to address the following liquid (in the form of bits of paper), which a
issues: first, do no harm; second, ensure the laboratory worker discovered. The play
safety of laboratory workers and the illustrated the sequence of events to follow to
surrounding communities; third, incorporate warn others and then both contain and clean up
the principles of the Biological Weapons the spill, including donning plastic shopping
Convention into daily practice. bags to simulate disposable laboratory boots and
white ladies’ gloves as their laboratory
Questions for Discussion equivalent.
 What are the regulatory bodies in your
country that oversee laboratory safety?
 How are students taught about laboratory Facilitator Debriefing
safety and safe practices?
 What is the reporting structure in the event Each day during the Institute the facilitators
that you perceive unsafe practices? met—typically toward the end of the day and
 Is there protection for people who report while the groups were working on their
unsafe practices? projects—to share their successes and
 What kinds of laboratories should be used challenges, compare approaches to facilitation
for dangerous experiments? that might be used by others, and agree on goals
 What is the Biological Weapons Convention and work for the next day’s group sessions. A
and how does it apply to biomedical final session, which took place after the Institute
research? ended so that facilitators could reflect on the
entire week of group work, is described in
Chapter 6 as part of the evaluation process.


These sessions enabled the facilitators to meetings to plan for the next day, which allowed
identify issues that impeded the optimal them sometimes to alter assignments in response
function of the small groups, particularly in the to the dynamics of the small groups.
initial stages of collaboration. For instance, a Toward the end of the Institute, one team of
policy at NASI requires all members of a team facilitators began designing the survey that was
from a college or university to work together in administered three weeks after the completion of
small groups to develop their teachable units. the Institute. A separate team designed the
However, the dynamics in some groups at the Request for Applications (see Appendix G) that
Institute resulted in the facilitation team’s was disseminated to all participants. Through
decision to declare that no two people from the that mechanism, participants could apply for
same institution could work together in the small grants from the Institute to help them
small groups. This action enabled all participants develop instructional materials and implement a
to take part in group discussions without training session in their home institutions. The
concern for how they were perceived or the need next chapter presents more information on the
to defer, especially in the case where teams were grants as part of the discussion of post-Institute
composed of a senior faculty member and more activities and implementation.
junior colleagues. Facilitators also used these

Chapter 5
Post-Institute Activities
This chapter provides a description of the attended the reunion to present and discuss the
activities undertaken by participants after the work. Four participants who did not receive
Institute in Jordan in September 2012 to funding also provided information about their
implement what they had learned. implementation activities; one of these
nonfunded projects also was presented at the
reunion.
GRANTS TO INSTITUTE PARTICIPANTS The various proposals (details in Table 5-1)
related, to a greater or lesser extent, to the topics
One of the requirements in the call for discussed at the Institute. The funded proposals
applications was that “Applicants must use one called for introducing active learning techniques
or more of the instructional materials developed modeled at the Institute with topics related to
at the Institute in their teaching in the [next] responsible conduct of science; workshops on
semester.” Through a competitive Request for safe laboratory practices/biosafety; mentor-
Applications (RFA), grants in the amount of trainee relationships and responsibilities;
$1,500 each were offered to enable participants misconduct/improper behavior; authorship; and
to carry out these activities.54 Of the 28 ethical values in science and research. Some
participants at the Institute, 23 applied for these grantees collected data on their target audiences’
grants either as individuals or as teams. Project knowledge of responsible science before and
staff reviewed the applications and awarded a after implementing teaching modules on
total of eight grants based on the quality of responsible science. Others focused on teaching
application. The successful applications how to design an experiment to implement a
addressed the following issues: overall learning research project as a segue to discussing
goals of the proposed activity; teaching methods responsible conduct of science. The awardees
to be used; expected audience; budget (including focused on strengthening problem-solving
any in-kind support from the home institutions) abilities, enhancing critical thinking, and
and timeline; anticipated difficulties and how building capacity among educators. Some
they might be addressed; and any attempts to emphasized overall awareness of scientists’
sustain the teaching and promotion of professional responsibilities. Within the context
responsible science in their home institutions of the principal investigator’s (PI’s) country and
and their country of residence. institution, all proposals were to receive some
Each of the successful grantees submitted a form of institutional support (financial or in-
report about the resulting project and all but one kind) and all provided a plan for sustaining their
projects.

54
The application form may be found in Appendix G.
65

The materials created, sessions and activities.

workshops conducted, and results of these  Expand on the kinds of assessments they
activities were the focus of the reunion meeting. used to measure what their intended
audiences had learned and the evaluations
they developed to determine the efficacy of
REUNION their projects.
 Consider how their projects might be
The reunion meeting took place on April 20, improved and sustained over time.
2013, at a hotel in Amman, Jordan, and on the
campus of the Jordan University for Science and The second day at JUST was to be devoted to
Technology (JUST) in Ibrid on April 21. Dr. each group summarizing its discussions from
Elizabeth Heitman represented the National the previous day, followed by full group
Academies committee that planned the Institute discussion of surprises, insights, opportunities,
along with project staff members Drs. Lida assessments, and sustainability issues.
Anestidou and Jay Labov. Nine Institute The organizing group thought that formal
participants from Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, and presentations should be short, with greatest
Yemen, seven of whom received grants to emphasis on the other points for discussion
catalyze their implementation work after the noted above. However, all participants came
Institute, attended the reunion, gave prepared to describe their projects more
presentations about their individual projects, extensively and to a person asked for the agenda
and contributed to the general discussions that to be altered to accommodate more detailed
serve as the basis for the remainder of this discussion of each individual project.
chapter and for the discussion and conclusions Accordingly, day 1 and the morning of day 2
in Chapter 6. The names of participants, their were devoted to detailed presentation and
institutions and countries, and a brief overview discussion of each project. The afternoon of day
of their projects are presented in Table 5-1. 2 focused on the sustainability of individual
The Best Laid Schemes55: Several conference initiatives and consideration of how the Institute
calls with the National Academies team that participants might collaborate both with each
organized the reunion resulted in an agenda that other and with members of the NRC organizing
was sent to participants before the reunion. committee and staff to bring a much needed
Participants were scheduled to work in small emphasis on teaching responsible science
groups on day 1, to (“scientific integrity,” as proposed by one
Institute participant) to the Middle East–North
 Provide brief overviews of their projects to Africa (MENA) region.
the other members of the group. The lessons that the committee has drawn
 Discuss aspects of their projects that worked from the reunion are presented in the next
as originally envisioned. chapter. Combined with other efforts to evaluate
 Describe to other group members any the Institute, these provide the basis for the
surprises, new insights, and unexpected committee’s conclusions about next steps in its
opportunities that presented themselves work in the MENA region and beyond.
during and after their implementation

55
Burns, Robert. 1785. Poem: To A Mouse.

TABLE 5-1 Projects funded and/or presented at the reunion.

INSTITUTIONAL
PROGRAM FORMATS AND
GRANT IMPLEMENTERS TOPICS SUPPORT AND
AUDIENCES
SUSTAINABILITY
ALGERIA
Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research
Halima Benbouza, Biotechnology 1-day workshop: Potential threats from The CRBt offered facilities to
Research Center (CRBt) - Interactive presentations with biotechnology and life sciences: hold the workshop.
Noureddine Yassaa, University of Q&A, presenter, and 3 facilitators What is dual use research?
Sciences and Technology Houari - Brainstorming Collaborative science Implementers to propose that
Boumediene - Case studies Mentor and trainee relationships RCS course be included in
Abdelkader Bouyakoub, University - Audience response cards Being a responsible author the student curriculum of
of Oran (Es-Sénia) - Postcourse questionnaire Research integrity and misconduct their institutions.
Ben Amar Cheba, University of
Oran (Es-Sénia) 26 researchers/PhD students at the Team also willing to give the
CRBt RCS module in different
scientific institutions.
EGYPT
Future Perspective of “Responsible Conduct of Science” at South Valley University
Mahmmoud Sayed Abd El-sadek, Five 3-hour workshops: Authorship responsibilities South Valley University
South Valley University - Interactive discussion Scientific misconduct offered infrastructure
Farag Khoday Moalla Hamed, - Case studies by the presenters and Responsible research practices including seminar rooms and
South Valley University the audience multimedia suppliers at the
Hamdy Saad Sadek El-Sheshtawy, - Brainstorming university’s three campuses
South Valley University (Qena, Hurghada, and
45 faculty and graduate students on Luxor).
3 campuses of South Valley
University The team plans to integrate


this module into the current

program “Improving Skills of
Staff Members.”
Principles of Professionalism in Science

Yahya Zakaria Eid, Kafrelsheikh Two 3-hour workshops: Components of responsible conduct Kafrelsheik University
University - Lecture of research and science: offered the conference hall
- Interactive discussions - Authorship and publication and projector.
practices
35 academic staff and graduate - Plagiarism New and more specialized
students - Conflict of interest teachable units will be
- Scientific integrity developed to cover the needs
of the participants.
Negotiations with the

university to allow these
workshops to occur on a
regular basis.
Teaching Safe Laboratory Practice in Mansoura University by Active Learning

Mohamed Mostafa Elhadidy, Learner-centered teaching course Components of safe laboratory The university provided
Mansoura University consisting of 4-5 blocks: practice: seminar halls, facilities, and
Mohamed Salah El-Tholoth, - Brainstorming - General safety practices materials for the course. It
Mansoura University - Small group discussion: Safety - Laboratory hazards also supported the time spent
scenarios, multiple choice questions - Biological safety levels by the instructors to teach the
- Poster design - Personal protective equipment course.
- Role play - Spill response and waste disposal
- Case studies - Decontamination The team plans to
- Emergency response disseminate the teaching
20 undergraduate students course to different research
units as it grows and evolves

2 90-minute facilitator training based on the university’s

modules (4 facilitators) needs. They also plan to
provide workshops on a
regular basis for current and
future faculty and students.
They further plan to apply
for grants to support their
work.
Study of Responsible Conduct of Science in the Curricula of Scientific Schools

Mohamed El-Sayed El-Shinawi, 2-day awareness campaign on the Responsible conduct of research: Ain Shams University
Ain Shams University campus of Ain Shams University - Animal welfare provided lecture halls and
65 members of the Ain Shams Medical School: - Research misconduct space for the booths free of
Medical Students Research - Booklet about RCR - Protection of human subjects charge.
Association - Interactive maze with stations - Mentor-trainee relationships
- Pre- and postcampaign regarding authorship The data collected from the
questionnaire - Conflict of interest questionnaires will be
analyzed to inform the
Lecture day Lectures: content of future workshops
- Medical research ethics on RCS as well as an e-
340 medical students (campaign) - Cancer biology research lab: learning platform for
185 medical students (lecture day) Progress and achievements students.
- From operation room to research
lab: Solving health problems and
improving the quality of life
Responsible Conduct of Scientific Research

Mohamed Labib Salem, Tanta Three 2-hour workshops/week, each Research integrity and misconduct The proposed workshops will
University devoted to one topic. The workshops Biosafety be integrated into the Faculty
Marwa Ahmed Ali, Tanta will be repeated three times (2nd Mentor-trainee relationships and Leadership and Development
University time in May and 3rd in June 2013) responsibilities Program (FLDP) that aims to


Yahya Ahmed S. Al-Naggar, Tanta - Presentation enhance the skills of faculty

University - Open discussion members at all levels.
Amal Hashish, Tanta University - Small group work
Atef Nwair, Tanta University - Case studies The materials used during
Eman Balah, Tanta University the course will serve as the
Soha Helmy, Tanta University 75 graduate students foundation for core
undergraduate and
postgraduate courses in
research responsibility,
biosafety, and the mentor-
trainee relationship in the
university.
Interactive Learning for Teaching Nursing Administration Course*

Yaldez K. Zein ElDin, Damanhour A block of four lectures in each of Staffing Use the outcomes from the
University two semesters Documentation evaluation to modify the
- Jigsaw Quality of patient care lecture format, presentation
- Small group discussion Scheduling and content
- Brainstorming Provide learning workshops
- Role play for faculty
90-120 students/semester
YEMEN
Mentor-Trainee Relationships and Responsibilities
Samira Al-Eryani, Sana’a University Two-day workshop Mentoring: origin of mentoring; The University covered 20%
Huda Omer Basaleem, University - Presentations with active learning about mentor-trainee qualities and of the projected cost.
of Aden - Colored audience response cards relationships; what is mentoring;
Khaled Abdulla Al-Sakkaf, - Small group work/discussion ethics of mentoring; The Center for Medical
University of Aden - Sharing discussions with other Authorship Education, Sana’a University
Ahmed Moharem, Thamar groups Mentor trainee conflicts will provide modest future

University - Case studies with role playing Current situation of postgraduate funding and venue to support
Qais Abdullah Nogaim, Ibb - Videos presenting cases regulations in universities in Yemen future workshops.
University and mentoring programs
Fayza Hamood Eyssa, Sana’a 24 members of the academic
University teaching staff from the Faculty of
Abdusalem Mohammed Al- Medicine and Health Sciences and
Mekhlafi, Sana’a University training staff from the National
Centre of Public Health Laboratories
Planning and Implementing Scientific Research

Huda Omer Basaleem, University 4-day workshop Planning and implementing The College of Medicine
of Aden - Backward design scientific research: provided the venue, paid for
Khaled Abdulla Al-Sakkaf, - Interactive learning - Steps of the research process the cost of 72 Internet hours,
University of Aden - Case studies - Design of a scientific proposal and covered the expenses for
- Group discussion - Research methods 3 facilitators.
- Colored audience response cards - Manuscript writing and
publication The team will continue to
23 assistant and 2 associate offer this training and
professors from the Faculty of Analysis of scientific misconduct incorporate the teaching
Medicine and Health Sciences methods in other courses.
Communicating research findings
*This activity was not funded by a project grant.



Chapter 6
Evaluation, Insights, and Realities
This chapter presents a preliminary evaluation methods with a focus on responsible science at
of the Institute.56 It begins with an account of the their home institutions. However, it was clear
final facilitator debriefing at the end of the that many of the ideas introduced at the Institute
Institute and also includes data from the survey were new to the participants. It also was clear
(see Appendix G) sent to participants three that, in contrast to the National Academies
weeks later and their open-ended comments Summer Institutes on Undergraduate Biology
about particular aspects of the meeting. Insights Education (NASI), a smaller amount of
from the outcomes of the implementation grants instruction about pedagogy per se (versus
and the discussions at the reunion are included modeling pedagogy during discussions about
as well. Finally, the committee offers its responsible science) would be easier for
judgments, based on the experience of designing participants to absorb and process.
and implementing the Institute, to inform Some of the Institute’s potential impact was
similar current and future activities. lost because of the lack of advance preparation.
Unfortunately, the committee’s expectation that
participants would read the background
EVALUATION materials prior to the Institute was not made
clear. For future institutes it will be important to
Final Facilitator Team57 Debriefing convey as clearly as possible everything what the
participants are expected to do in advance. This
The facilitator team members met immediately also might include offering a series of questions
after the Institute to share their thoughts about or dilemmas to be considered during the
the event. The majority of the participants were Institute. Such questions, conveyed in cover
committed to implementing the educational letters or emails, rather than the background
readings themselves, would engender greater
interest and curiosity and alert participants to
56
As discussed in Chapters 3 and 4, in the field of education
research “assessment” and “evaluation” are different
the kinds of problem solving to be undertaken
concepts. Assessment refers to “tools for measuring during the Institute.
progress toward and achievement of the learning goal” To be accepted to the NASI, one member
(Handelsman et al., 2007:19), while evaluation refers to “the per team was expected to participate in the
process of analyzing the results of assessment and
reunion meeting during the academic year 2012-
determining whether the goals have been achieved”
(Handelsman et al., 2007:20). 2013. The facilitator team agreed that it would
57
The “facilitator team” includes members of the be very important to (1) continue to provide all
committee and invited individuals who worked with participants access to the Institute’s materials
participants at the Institute.
73

and (2) be available to help participants address Chapter 5). Twenty-six of 28 participants
questions after they return to their home responded to the survey, the results of which are
institutions. described in the next several sections.
The facilitators and other leaders of NASI
routinely identify participants who might be General Information about the Participants
invited to serve as facilitators at future NASI. General characteristics of the participants were
Identifying and preparing facilitators from the discussed in Chapter 4 as part of the committee’s
participant pool enables them to reflect on the approach to recruitment. Figure 6-1 shows that
goals, objectives, and implementation strategies most participants identified themselves as
from two perspectives and enables them to university faculty while a few identified
become leaders for disseminating NASI’s goals themselves as academic administrators.
and practices. The facilitator team concluded The survey asked participants to indicate
that a similar model would be appropriate for whether they teach primarily undergraduates,
future Institutes. graduate or postdoctoral students, or others. The
results are shown in Figure 6-2. Among the
Post-Institute Survey responses to the third choice (“Other”) were
demonstrator (i.e., a master’s-level student),
As part of the evaluation process, the facilitator chief researcher, and faculty who teach both
team developed a web-based survey for the undergraduate and graduate students.
participants. Three weeks after the Institute Participants were also asked to indicate up
participants received an invitation to take the to three reasons they chose to attend the
survey together with the Request for Institute. Figure 6-3 shows the percentage of
Applications for the implementation grants (see each selected option.
FIGURE 6-1 Rank of attendees by title (N=26). SOURCE: Data compiled by the committee.

Evaluation, Insights, and Realities 75
FIGURE 6-2 How participants described their primary audiences. “Faculty” refers to a participant who is
actively engaged in research and who also teaches. “Lecturer” refers to a participant whose primary
responsibilities are teaching. SOURCE: Data compiled by committee.
FIGURE 6-3 Reasons participants applied for the Institute. The answers in this figure are presented in
ascending order starting with the option chosen by the fewest number of people. This differs from the order in
which the options were presented in the survey.
A To reconnect with colleagues who share my interest in responsible conduct of science
B To meet colleagues from my country who share interests in responsible conduct of science
C To meet colleagues from other countries who share interests in responsible conduct of science
D To become more involved with future efforts to improve education about the responsible conduct of
research internationally
E To deepen my understanding of the issues related to the responsible conduct of science
F To become more involved with future efforts to improve education about the responsible conduct of
research in my country
G To discover tools, resources, and best practices for incorporating evidence-based teaching techniques
into my courses
SOURCE: Data compiled by the committee.


Participants’ Overall Rating of the Institute plenary and breakout sessions.

Participants were asked to rate different Figure 6-5 illustrates participants’ high levels
aspects of the Institute; Figure 6-4 shows that of satisfaction with the overall goals of the
more than 80 percent rated the quality of the Institute, the instructional materials, and the
sessions as either excellent or very good. There relevance of the topics to their professional
was a greater diversity of responses on questions careers.
about the use and balance of time spent in
Participants' Ratings of the Institute's Sessions,

Delivery of Workshop Material and Group Work
100%
90%
80%
Percent Response (N=26)
70%
Poor
60%
Fair
50% Good
Very Good
40%
Excellent
30%
20%
10%
0%
A B C D E F
Sessions Delivery of Material Group Work
FIGURE 6-4 Participants’ ratings of different aspects of the Institute, as defined:

A Quality of sessions about the responsible conduct of science
B Quality of sessions about the scientific basis for the use of active learning techniques
C Inclusion of information and perspectives from a diverse range of views
D Amount of time devoted to discussions during plenary sessions
E Balance of time spent in whole group and team breakout sessions
F Helpfulness of your breakout group’s facilitators

Participants' Ratings of the Institute's Goals, Instructional Materials,

and Relevance to Their Careers
100%
90%
Percent Response (N=26)
80%
70%
Poor
60% Fair
50% Good
40% Very Good
Excellent
30%
20%
10%
0%
A B C D E F
Goals Materials Relevance
FIGURE 6-5 Participants’ ratings of different aspects of the Institute, as defined below:
A Clarity of Institute’s goals and objectives

B Relevance of topics that were presented in relation to the stated goals of the Institute
C Usefulness of resources provided by the organizers and presenters (e.g., background resources in the
Dropbox and briefing book)
D Value of the Institute as a learning or professional development experience
E Relevance to you and your work of the issues presented
F Time to meet and interact with other participants
When asked “If the National Academies Open-Ended Comments

were to organize and host additional Institutes Participants were asked what they found to
or related activities on this topic in the future, be particularly effective or not effective about the
would you be interested in participating?” 81 Institute. The majority of comments indicated
percent of the participants selected “definitely,” that the Institute was effective for many reasons,
with the remaining selecting “maybe.” Of those but some reflected that the pace of the Institute
who indicated they would like to be involved in was intense and the schedule crowded with too
future Institutes, 62 percent wrote that they many subjects. Table 6-1 lists the participants’
would like to be a facilitator. responses (edited for clarity), organized by
effective and ineffective aspects of the Institute.


TABLE 6-1 Effective and Ineffective Aspects of the Institute. SOURCE: Information compiled
by the committee.
Effective Aspects of the Institute
 Interactive comprehensive coverage of all topics in a friendly yet responsible
environment.
 Round table discussion and cases are effective
 The open discussion was very effective...the organization of the groups at the
beginning and during the workshop was great. Talks were unexpectedly awesome.
 Effective points: 1- Active interaction of well qualified trainers. 2- Time management.
3- Clear follow up plan. 4- Appropriate class facilities. 5- Hospitality.
 Everything was very interesting and very exciting: 1. Active Learning Techniques 2.
Trainers 3. Scientific Material 4. Work in Teams 5. Exchange of Experiences
 Highly experienced faculty with simple transfer of data to participants
 Effective: Knowing other faculties nationally and internationally. The spirit of
cooperation made the institute pass like one day.
 Smooth cruising into the presentation and discussion of the contents of the Institute
and also dealing firmly and friendly from the institute presenters and facilitators with
the participants.
 In my opinion all training sessions were effective.
 Conducting research responsibly; the development of professionalism in science;
being part of the responsible scientific community.
 The committee and facilitators were serious and friendly at the same time. The use of
all materials used in a manner not boring.
 The use of new approach in teaching and the use of dual science
 Most effective was Pedagogy
 Most of the activities in the institute were particularly effective.
 I found the effective points were the group discussion and how the facilitator helped
us to get correct aspects and encouraged every participant to integrate with each
other. Using the clickers during the lecture was new to me. How to teach the complex
and difficult scientific topics in thoughtful ways.
 This is the first time I’ve attended such an intensive educational workshop. The tools
such as case studies and role playing, I found more effective for me. The iclicker was
also an effective tool to use for evaluation, however, I don’t think I will use it at my
institution with the large numbers of students....probably very expensive to get.
 I think the workshop was very valuable and gave me more experience and also gave
me the chance to meet and deal with other international colleagues.
 The Institute was effective for many reasons: - It was an excellent training for me to
be confronted to work with people from developed countries and countries who are
facing the same problems as in my country. - To learn new tenets and pedagogical
techniques for active learning. - Learn more about the different facets of what it
means to conduct responsible science. - To share thoughts and learn on case studies
about relevant topics: co-authorships, biosafety and biosecurity, international
collaboration etc. - Develop a new network for future collaboration with mutual

interest/benefit
 New teaching techniques and the assessment methods I found particularly effective
for me.
 I found that using case study and other methods of interactive learning was very
effective and I will apply in teaching courses in my institution. Moreover, subjects of
discussion like misconduct and safe laboratory standards are very important and
direct our minds to very critical issues.
 They worked as one team and shared in all discussing points and activities in the
workshop
 The responsible conduct of research thru discussing issues related to mentoring,
authorship and active learning
 Interactive session on scientific misconduct cases
 J’ai sincèrement admiré le sérieux des organisateurs et facilitateurs et leur engagement
dans le travail pour mener bien et réussir les objectifs qu’ils s’étaient fixés.
Personnellement j’ai énormément appris sur le plan professionnel bien sûr mais aussi
sur le plan humain ou j’ai vu à l’œuvre la générosité sans limite ni faille de certaines
personnes, leur disponibilité à tout instant ainsi que leur penchant naturel à donner, à
se rendre utiles sans pour autant espérer une contre partie. Tels furent à mes yeux les
personnes qui ont pris en charge cette entreprise. Le groupe américain a était
exemplaire à plus d’un titre... Que ses membres soient tous remerciés!
(I sincerely admire the 'seriousness' (professionalism, effectiveness) of the organizers
and facilitators and their commitment to successfully pursue the set goals. Personally,
I learned an enormous amount at the professional level but also at the level of human
relations observing in practice the limitless generosity and availability (of the
aforementioned people). (I admired) their natural (spontaneous) offer to give (share)
and to be of use without any compensation. Such have been the individuals in charge
of this (whole) endeavor. The American group has been exemplary in more than one
way (above and beyond the call of duty). All its members deserve (our) gratitude.)
Ineffective Aspects of the Institute

 The programme was very crowded.
 Dual use issues were delinquent.
 On the other hand, there were some issues regarding the place and the time of the
workshop: (1) We took about 4 hours to travel from Amman to Aqaba and from
Aqaba to Amman and this was fatiguing for me. (2) We start every day from (8 Am to
7 Pm) and this is too much time. (3) There is no entertainment and fun means during
the workshop.
 The survey is ineffective.
 The intensive working hours is one drawback.
 I think the contents were very superficial as the institute tried to give us more than
one subject in only one week as the pedagogy.
 Each topic should be a separate workshop.


INSIGHTS  NASI have demonstrated that a reunion of

some participants after an Institute can
NASI, which involves a variety of evidence- provide new insights about participants’
based approaches to active teaching, learning, challenges, resources, and opportunities for
engagement, and assessment, can be adapted to networking and for sustaining programs (for
different topics, cultural contexts, and countries. details, see Chapter 5). The Institute
In the course of reviewing the design and described in this report further confirmed
implementation of this Institute, the committee that a reunion can be especially important
identified a number of insights that could help to for participants from developing countries.
improve future projects. They include logistical, For example, by the end of the reunion in
academic, and cultural challenges and realities. Jordan, the scientists who attended agreed
that their ability to conduct their own work
 Active engagement of committee members around responsible conduct and to reach
and Institute leaders before, during, and other colleagues at their home institutions,
after the Institute is crucial. across their individual countries, and in the
 A detailed application and merit-based MENA region as a whole could be expanded
selection process can identify enthusiastic and sustained by establishing a network
and committed participants who will, in among them. They decided to use this
turn, demonstrate the importance of such network to share ideas, common challenges,
approaches to colleagues at their home and opportunities, and to develop joint
institutions and in their disciplines. proposals for future work.
 Teaching about and modeling pedagogy can  As with the development of NASI, new
play a significant role in the success of an Institutes will require continuing
Institute. experimentation with and evaluation of all
 The demanding pace of the Institute made it aspects of their design. Feedback from the
hard for some participants to comprehend participants, combined with the results of
the concepts and techniques fully and apply their projects, can play an important role in
them during small group work. Future future iterations.
Institutes will benefit either by providing  The introduction of both new pedagogies
more time to integrate active learning with and new content at the same time can be a
new content or by reducing the breadth or significant challenge for some participants.
both. Reviewing background materials in advance
 The design of resources and assessments for of the Institute can lessen this impact.
an Institute benefits from particular However, materials written in English about
attention to linguistic and cultural new concepts, such as active learning and
differences among participants and dual use, may present obstacles for non-
facilitators. Working with partners from the English speakers.
region where the Institute will take place
allows organizers to take into account local
customs, traditions, and cultures in ways REALITIES
that remove barriers and foster stronger
relationships among organizers and  Framing biosafety and dual use issues in the
participants. context of responsible science was

meaningful to many participants.  Scientific research in the MENA region has

However, based on conversations during advanced remarkably over the last
plenary discussions with the participants generation. But participants reiterated that
who attended the reunion meeting in the lack of a formal framework and
Amman, practical realities such as the lack infrastructure for research in their countries
of basic scientific equipment, reliable (e.g., the absence of comprehensive policies
Internet connections, and access to scientific and oversight structures regarding
journals impede scientists in this region, and authorship, peer review, research with
especially those from more impoverished laboratory animals and human subjects, and
nations, from undertaking research at a level biosafety) makes it difficult for scientists to
where dual use issues raise concerns for follow international standards and to teach
them. People undertaking activities where best practices in responsible science to their
research with dual use potential and/or students.
misuse of technologies is to be a topic need  As the committee learned from the active
to take this reality into account when learning exercise conducted on day 1 of the
planning their events or programs. Institute, in which participants from each
 Some concepts that are crucial to active nation worked together to describe their
learning, responsible science, and dual use country’s system of higher education, there
cannot be expressed in Arabic. In most of are both similarities and differences in
the countries represented at this Institute, education philosophies, approaches to
teaching about science occurs in English but teaching and learning, facilities, and
instructors sometimes provide additional resources among nations. These differences
explanations or contexts in Arabic (or need to be taken into consideration when
French in Algeria). Arabic-speaking planning future Institutes. A recent report
scientists and students may interpret English funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New
words in ways that are different from what York provides useful data to help organizers
the organizers intend. For example, the of future events take these differences into
facilitator team learned that there is only one consideration (Bhandari and El-Amine,
Arabic word for the two English words 2012).
“search” and “research,” which may  The small grants awarded to participants
contribute to misunderstanding the were used creatively to address an array of
standards for plagiarism in English-language educational needs that they identified, as
journals among Arabic-speaking scientists noted in Table 5-1. In many cases these
and students. For example, several funds prompted subsequent institutional
participants told the group that when they support to sustain participants’ instructional
ask their students to define “research,” the activities. However, as also occurs in the
common response is to find the information United States, limited funding restricted the
in question on Google or another search ability of these motivated science educators
engine. The students are not concerned to reach larger audiences who would benefit
about copying and pasting information from from instruction on responsible science,
the Internet into their essays and research biosafety, and dual use issues.
reports.


At the reunion, discussions after each following four broad categories represent an
presentation and after all presenters had amalgam of these suggestions:
described their post-Institute activities revealed a
great deal of variation in the ways participants in  Implications of dual use
those activities were surveyed about their The committee was charged with addressing
learning and the project’s efficacy. Assessment research with “dual use” potential in the
and evaluation are an issue for science faculty context of responsible conduct of science as
around the world. Providing additional guidance part of its Statement of Task (Box 1-2 in
and models of survey instruments before such Chapter 1). However, as a result of both
projects are undertaken could provide much designing the Institute and engaging with its
more useful and usable data for future participants, it became clear to the
initiatives. committee that the term “dual use” might
Taken together, these insights offer not be the most appropriate one to use to
important lessons for the design and communicate to the next generation of
implementation of future programs in the scientists and the various publics the
MENA region as well as in other parts of the complexity of the issues. Through the case
world. studies presented and the discussions, it
became apparent that “multiple uses” might
be a preferable descriptor since virtually all
IMPLICATIONS: NEXT STEPS AND scientific activities are on a continuum from
SUSTAINABILITY exemplary to malicious conduct.58 Given the
differences between cultural norms,
As discussed briefly in Chapter 2, NASI, which perspectives, and levels of scientific research
are intended to transform how undergraduate among countries, scientists may be
biology is taught in the United States, have uncertain about boundaries of
recognized that fundamental change takes time. ethical/unethical behavior that “dual use”
Similarly, the committee agrees that for connotes because these behaviors are more
meaningful change to be sustainable, the complex than these two categories imply.
projects and lessons learned from the first There could, therefore, be value in
Institute need to be followed by additional emphasizing a continuum rather than a
efforts. In modifying future Institutes or similar starker dichotomy of research and behavior
activities, these efforts would also need to take as part of the discussions at the Institutes.
into account the insights gained through the
committee’s evaluation work for the first
Institute discussed above.

New Possibilities and Needs 58
The term was adopted by the International Union of Pure
and Applied Chemistry for the educational materials on
Multiple Uses of Chemicals that it developed in 2007 in
Based on feedback from Institute participants,
cooperation with the Organization for the Prohibition of
and others who became familiar with the Chemical Weapons. The material, which was being updated
Institute format as well as the committee, a series when this report went to press, is available at
of ideas emerged about ways to reconfigure or http://multiple.kcvs.ca/. The IAC-IAP project on
extend the potential reach of the Institutes. The Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise
chose the term “misuse” (IAC-IAP, 2012).

 Involving policymakers and regulators in As noted in Chapter 5 and earlier in this

both the planning and conduct of future chapter, assessment of learning and
Institutes evaluation of the efficacy of a program can
This Institute focused on recruiting faculty be difficult because (1) people whose native
and lecturers who would likely teach about language is not the one used to
the issues themselves. But policymakers and communicate may interpret words and
regulators of scientific policy, education, phrases differently than the Institute
development, rules, and funding from the organizers had intended, and (2) assessment
region where an Institute is conducted could of learning in higher education has
contribute valuable insights, perspectives, traditionally been restricted to summative
and doses of reality for participants assessments that are given infrequently and
interested in developing RCS educational are created by people with little expertise in
programs in their countries. In turn, psychometrics (the quantitative
policymakers and regulators could benefit measurement tools and techniques
from learning about the perspectives of developed in psychology). At the reunion
scientists from their own and other meeting in Amman it became clear that
countries in an environment that fosters grantees had used a broad spectrum of
respectful dialogue and challenges assessment and evaluation instruments.
assumptions of individual participants. Participants were eager to know what
Consulting with policymakers and instruments are already available that they
regulators from the region prior to an could modify for their own purposes. Online
Institute also could help organizers to better instruments, such as the NSF-supported
understand and tailor the subjects and issues Student Assessment of Their Learning Gains
that they hope to address in ways that will be (www.salgsite.org/), offer such templates.
more meaningful to participants at an When developing future institutes, it would
Institute. The importance of these be helpful to provide a list of such resources
connections became apparent when a and to spend some time helping participants
committee member and a member of the understand their uses and value.
project staff spent several days in Algeria For purposes of evaluating individual
consulting with representatives from various programs consistently, developing
government offices as well as educators at evaluation instruments that could be used by
Algerian universities in anticipation of a all participants who undertake subsequent
workshop there in June 2013 that is also activities could ease their workloads and
sponsored by the Biosecurity Engagement make comparable data more readily
Program at the U.S. Department of State. available to Institute organizers.
That workshop will assist Algerians in
developing a national curriculum in  Use of online technologies and resources
bioethics. Institutes that involve regional or
international travel for a small number of
 Assessment of learning and evaluation of participants from any given country will, by
programs during institutes and in subsequent themselves, have minuscule impact in
activities addressing a very large set of national issues.
NASI has begun to address this limitation by


expanding to a series of seven regional event or experience is expected to be sufficient to

institutes each summer based on the annual foster genuine change. Such an Institute would
institutes that were held in Madison, not be a part of this National Academies project
Wisconsin, for many years. However, and would require new funding, although it
regional institutes still cannot address the could take advantage of the ties already created
magnitude of change that is needed across with institutions such as the Bibliotheca
hundreds of institutions and tens, perhaps Alexandrina, The World Academy of Sciences
hundreds of thousands of students. In (TWAS), or the Jordan University of Science
addition, the costs for the Institute approach and Technology (JUST).
may be prohibitive in many parts of the The option for a follow-on Institute most
world. favored by the committee would bring together
Thus the use of increasingly sophisticated several facilitators from the first Institute with
online technologies and the development of some alumni. This arrangement could enhance
online resources to reach much larger their engagement with the methods and
numbers of scientists, educators, and concepts promoted by the program. In the
policymakers should be considered and course of this second Institute, the Bibliotheca
supported. Social media, massive open Alexandrina would have the opportunity to
online courses (MOOCs), and other forms develop and host a website with materials from
of distance learning are some possible the Institutes as well as other resources to
solutions. However, given this Institute's provide information and promote application of
emphasis on evidence-based active teaching responsible science and active learning in
and learning, it must be recognized that universities and other research settings
overreliance on online technologies might throughout the MENA region. Translating the
compromise this aspect of the experience. A Institute’s relevant materials into Arabic would
great deal of research is now under way to offer an outreach opportunity for interested
explore how such technologies might both scientists, policymakers, and others in the
enhance and compromise deep learning. region.
The results of this work, in combination It is also essential to help build participants’
with the ability of web-based approaches to capacity to work more independently in their
reach great numbers of students, should be home countries. To begin the process, two
taken into consideration by those who plan participants from the first Institute, from Yemen
future programs. and Egypt, will attend one of the 2013 regional
Summer Institutes in the United States.59 This
weeklong immersion in active learning
Potential Next Steps in the MENA Region techniques will significantly increase their skills
and abilities to implement active programs in
A second regional Institute where the lessons responsible science in their own countries as
from the first Institute would be applied is a well as to serve as facilitators at future Institutes.
logical activity to take advantage of the insights A number of participants already have
gained through this committee’s evaluation envisioned one-half to two-day “mini-Institutes”
work. As discussed in Chapter 2, one of the to provide basic content and active learning
fundamental characteristics of successful faculty
development programs is follow-up; no single
59
www.academiessummerinstitute.org/.

experiences to a particular department or participant network that involves the

faculty. These might be logical projects for NationalAcademies in parallel with other
former Institute participants to create, perhaps comparable programs on responsible science
in collaboration with a larger, continuing MENA and dual use issues.60

60
For example, with regard to dual use issues, the programs
on “dual use bioethics” operated by Bradford University
and a new two-year, EU-supported project to create an
“International Network of universities and institutes for
raising awareness on dual-use concerns in bio-technology”
that began work in January 2013 have connections to some
of the countries in the MENA region. Further information
about the Bradford activities is available at
www.brad.ac.uk/bioethics/about/ and about the EU project
at www.cbrn-coe.eu/Projects.aspx.



References
2nd WCRI (World Conference on Research The COPE Report. Available at

Integrity). 2010. Singapore Statement on http://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12.p
Research Integrity. Available at www. df.
singaporestatement.org/, accessed February Beecher, H. 1966. Ethics and clinical research.
27, 2013. New England Journal of Medicine
AAAS (American Association for the 274(24):1354-1360.
Advancement of Science). 2008. Professional Berg, P., D. Baltimore, S. Brenner, R.O. Roblin
and Graduate-Level Programs on Dual Use III, and M.F. Singer. 1975. Summary
Research and Biosecurity for Scientists statement of the Asilomar Conference on
Working in the Biological Sciences: Recombinant DNA Molecules. Proceedings
Workshop Report. Washington. Available at of the National Academy of Sciences
http://cstsp.aaas.org/files/AAAS_workshop_r 72(6):1981-1984.
eport_education_of_dual_use_life_science_re Bernhard, J. 2001. Does Active Engagement
search.pdf; accessed March 11, 2013. Curricula Give Long-Lived Conceptual
AAAS. 2011. Vision and Change in Understanding? Pp. 749-752 in Physics
Undergraduate Biology Education. Teacher Education Beyond 2000, R. Pinto
Washington. and S. Surinach, eds. Paris: Elsevier.
African Union. 2006. The Cairo Declaration. Bibliotheca Alexandrina. 2012. Linking Science
Extraordinary Conference of the African to Society: Proceedings of BioVision 2012.
Ministerial Council on Science and Alexandria, Egypt.
Technology (AMCOST), Bloom, B.S. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational
ET/AU/EXP/ST/Decl/13(II)\REV.1. 23-24 Objectives: The Classification of Educational
November. Available at http://www.africa- Goals. New York: D. McKay.
union.org/root/au/auc/departments/hrst/bios Branchaw, J., C. Pfund, and R. Rediske. 2010.
afety/DOC/level1/EXT.AU.EXP.ST.DclI.13(II Entering Research: Workshops for Students
).Rev1.pdf; accessed June 17, 2013. Beginning Research in Science. New York:
Agre, P., and A. Leshner. 2010. Bridging science W.H. Freeman & Co.
and society. Science 327(5968):921. Bransford, J.D.E., A.L.E. Brown, and R.R.E.
Albert, T. and E. Wager. 2003. How to handle Cocking. 1999. How People Learn: Brain,
authorship disputes: A guide for researchers. Mind, Experience, and School. Washington:
87

National Academies Press. Deer, B. 2011a. Secrets of the MMR scare: How
Brewer, C., and D. Smith, eds. 2011. Vision and the vaccine crisis was meant to make money.
Change in Undergraduate Biology BMJ 342:c5258.
Education. Washington: American Deer, B. 2011b. Secrets of the MMR scare: The
Association for the Advancement of Science. Lancet’s two days to bury bad news. BMJ
CDC (Centers for Disease Control and 342:c7001.
Prevention). 2006. Reconstruction of the Deer, B. 2011c. How the case against the MMR
1918 Influenza Pandemic Virus: Questions vaccine was fixed. BMJ 342:c5347.
& Answers. Available at www.cdc.gov/flu/ Enserink, M., and D. Malakoff. 2012. Will flu
about/qa/1918flupandemic.htm; accessed papers lead to new research oversight?
March 11, 2013. Science 335:21-22.
CDC and NIH (National Institutes of Health). Epstein, G.L. 2001. Controlling biological
2007. Biosafety in Microbiological and warfare threats: Resolving potential tensions
Biomedical Laboratories, 5th ed. (L.C. among the research community, industry,
Chosewood and D.E. Wilson, eds.). and the national security community.
Washington: U.S. Government Printing Critical Reviews in Microbiology 27(4):321-
Office. 354.
CEN (European Committee for ESF (European Science Foundation). 2000.
Standardization). 2008. International Good scientific practice in research and
Laboratory Biorisk Management Standard. scholarship. Policy Briefing 10. Strasbourg,
CWA 15793. Brussels. France. Available at www.esf.org/fileadmin/
Coley, J., and K.D. Tanner. 2012. Common Public_documents/Publications/ESPB10.pdf;
origins of misconceptions: Cognitive accessed June 4, 2013.
principles and the development of biology ESF. 2007. Research Integrity: Global
thinking. CBE Life Sciences Education Responsibility to Foster Common
11:209-215. Available at Standards. Policy Briefing 30. Strasbourg,
www.lifescie.org/content/11/3/209.full.pdf/ht France. Available at www.esf.org/fileadmin/
ml. Public_documents/Publications/SPB%2030%
Cressey, D. 2007. Hippocratic oath for scientists. 20Research%20Integrity.pdf; accessed June 4,
Nature News Blog. Available at 2013.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2007/09/hippoc ESF. 2008. Stewards of Integrity: Institutional
ratic_oath_for_scientist.html; accessed June Approaches to Promote and Safeguard
4, 2013. Good Research Practice in Europe.
Crowe, A., C. Dirks, and M.P. Wenderoth. 2008. Strasbourg, France.
Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom’s ESF. 2010. Fostering Research Integrity in
taxonomy to enhance student learning in Europe. Strasbourg, France.
biology. CBE Life Sciences Education ESF and ALLEA (All European Academies).
7(4):368–381. 2010. The European Code of Conduct for

References 89
Research Integrity. Strasbourg, France. Heitman, E., and R.E. Bulger. 2005. Assessing
EUBARnet (European Biosecurity Awareness the educational literature in the responsible
Raising Network). 2012. Security conduct of research for core content.
Implications of Life Sciences and Accountability in Research 12:207-224.
Technologies: A Multidisciplinary HHS (Department of Health and Human
Approach. Prepublication copy. Como, Italy: Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of
Landau Network Centro Volta. Public Health and Science, Office of
Fouchier, R.A.M., A. García-Sastre, Y. Kawaoka, Research Integrity). PHS Policy on
W.S. Barclay, N.M. Bouvier, I.H. Brown, I. Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of
Capua, H. Chen, R.W. Compans, R.B. Research (RCR). 2000. Available at
Couch, N.J. Cox, P.C. Doherty, R.O. Donis, www.or.org/pdf/PHS_Policy_on_RCR.pdf.
H. Feldmann, Y. Guan, J.M. Katz, O.I. Hilborn, R.C., ed. 2013. The Role of Scientific
Kiselev, H.D. Klenk, G. Kobinger, J. Liu, X. Societies in STEM Faculty Workshops.
Liu, A. Lowen, T.C. Mettenleiter, A.D.M.E. College Park, MD: American Association of
Osterhaus, P. Palese, J.S. Malik Peiris, D.R. Physics Teachers. Available at www.aapt.
Perez, J.A. Richt, S. Schultz-Cherry, J. Steel, org/Conferences/newfaculty/upload/STEM_R
K. Subbarao, D.E. Swayne, T. Takimoto, M. EPORT-2.pdf.
Tashiro, J.K. Taubenberger, P.G. Thomas, Horton, R. 2004. The lessons of MMR. Lancet
R.A. Tripp, T.M. Tumpey, R.J. Webby, R.G. 363:747-749.
Webster. 2013. Transmission studies resume IAC (InterAcademy Council) and IAP (The
for avian flu. Science 339 (6119):520-521; Global Network of Science Academies).
doi: 10.1126/science.1235140. 2012. Responsible Conduct in the Global
Garfinkel, M.S., D. Endy, G.L. Epstein, and R.M. Research Enterprise: A Policy Report.
Friedman. 2007. Synthetic genomics: Amsterdam.
Options for governance. Industrial IAP. 2005. Statement on Biosecurity. Available
Biotechnology 3(4):333-365. at www.interacademies.net/CMS/About/
Ghosh, P. 2007. UK science head backs ethics 3143.aspx; accessed February 27, 2013.
code. BBC News, September 12. Available at ICMJE (International Committee of Medical
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/- Journal Editors). 2010. Uniform
/2/hi/science/nature/6990868.stm. Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to
Handelsman, J., D. Ebert-May, R. Beichner, P. Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing
Bruns, A. Chang, R. DeHaan, J. Gentile, S. for Biomedical Publication. pp.1-3.
Lauffer, J. Stewart, S.M. Tilghman, and W.B. Available at www.icmje.org/urm_full.pdf.
Wood. 2004. Scientific teaching. Science ICSU (International Council for Science). 2008.
304(5670):521–522. Freedom, Responsibility and Universality of
Handelsman, J., S. Miller, and C. Pfund. 2007. Science. Paris.
Scientific Teaching. San Francisco: Freeman IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1989. The
and Sons. Responsible Conduct of Research in the

Health Sciences. Washington: National Maher, B. 2012. The biosecurity oversight.

Academy Press. Nature 485:431-434.
IOM. 2001. Preserving Public Trust: Michael, J. 2006. Where’s the evidence that
Accreditation and Human Research active learning works? Advances in
Participant Protection Programs. Physiology Education 30:159-167.
Washington: National Academies Press. Meltzer, D., Thornton, R. 2012. Resource Letter
IOM. 2010. Ethical Issues in Studying the Safety ALIP-1: Active-Learning Instruction in
of Approved Drugs. Washington: National Physics. American Journal of Physics 80(6).
Academies Press. Miller, S., and C. Pfund. 2011. Facilitator
IOM. 2011. Chimpanzees in Biomedical and Training Packet. Madison: University of
Behavioral Research. Washington: National Wisconsin. Unpublished.
Academies Press. Morris, J. 2012. Did lax laboratory safety
Jones, N. 2007. A code of ethics for the life practices kill this UCLA chemist? Mother
sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics Jones. Available at www.motherjones.com/
13:25-43. politics/2012/07/ucla-sheri-sangji-patrick-
Kochan, C.A., and J.M. Budd. 1992. The harran; accessed April 30, 2013.
persistence of fraud in the literature: The Mukunda, G., K.A. Oye, and S.C. Mohr. 2009.
Darsee case. Journal of the American Society What rough beast: Synthetic biology,
for Information Science 47(7):488-493. uncertainty, and the future of Biosecurity.
Knight, J.K., and W.B. Wood. 2005. Teaching Politics and the Life Sciences 28(2):2-26.
more by lecturing less. Cell Biology NAE (National Academy of Engineering). 2007.
Education 4:298-310. “Ethics in the Science Classroom: An
Kriesberg, N. undated. Animals as models. Instructional Guide for Secondary School
Available at http://ori.hhs.gov/education/ Science Teachers.” Online Ethics Center for
products/ncstate/models.htm; accessed April Engineering. Available at www.onlineethics.
29, 2013. org/Education/precollege/scienceclass.aspx.
Labov, J.B. 2004. From the National Academies: Nature. 2012. Comment: The fight over flu.
The challenges and opportunities for 481:257-259.
improving undergraduate science education NIH (National Institutes of Health). 1990.
through introductory courses. Cell Biology Requirement for programs in the
Education 3:212-214. responsible conduct of research in national
Labov, J., and J. Young. 2013. National research service award institutional training
Academies Summer Institutes on programs. NIH Guide Grants Contracts.
Undergraduate Education in Biology. In: 19:1.
Hillborn, R. (ed). pp. 21-24. The Role of NIH. 1992. Reminder and update: requirements
Scientific Societies in STEM Faculty for instruction in the responsible conduct of
Workshops. Washington: Council of research in NRSA institutional research
Scientific Society Presidents.

References 91
training grants. NIH Guide Grants NRC. 1995. On Being a Scientist, 2nd ed.
Contracts. Washington: National Academy Press.
NIH. 2001. Notice of suspension of PHS policy. NRC. 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind,
NOD-OD-01-020. Available at http://grants. Experience, and School (Expanded Edition).
nih.gov/grants/guilde/notice-files/NOT-OD- Washington: National Academy Press.
01-020.html. NRC. 2002. Scientific and Medical Aspects of
NIH. 2009. Update on the Requirement for Human Reproductive Cloning. Washington:
Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of National Academies Press.
Research. Notice Number: NOT-OD-10- NRC. 2003. BIO2010: Transforming
019. Available at Undergraduate Education for Future
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice- Research Biologists. Washington: National
files/NOT-OD-10-019.html; accessed March Academies Press.
11, 2013. NRC. 2004. Biotechnology Research in an Age of
NIH. 2012. Notice Pertinent to the March 2012 Terrorism. Washington: National
Revisions of the NIH Guidelines for Academies Press.
Research Involving Recombinant or NRC. 2005. Guidelines for Embryonic Stem Cell
Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules (NIH Research. Washington: National Academies
Guidelines). Available at http://oba.od. Press.
nih.gov/oba/rac/Guidelines/NIH_Guidelines NRC. 2006a. Globalization, Biotechnology, and
_new.pdf; accessed March 11, 2013. the Future of the Life Sciences. Washington:
NIH (Office of Extramural Research). 2013. National Academies Press.
Grants Policy: Research integrity. Available NRC. 2006b. America’s Lab Report:
at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/research_ Investigations in High School Science.
integrity/index.htm. Washington: National Academies Press.
Novossiolova, T., G. Mancini, and M.R. Dando. NRC. 2007a. Science and Security in a Post 9/11
2013. Toward Effective and Sustainable World: A Report Based on Regional
Biosecurity Education for the Life Sciences: Discussions Between the Science and
The Benefits of Active Learning. Bradford, Security Communities. Washington:
UK: Bradford Disarmament Research National Academies Press.
Centre. NRC. 2007b. Taking Science to School.
NRC (National Research Council). 1989. On Washington: National Academies Press.
Being a Scientist. Washington: National NRC. 2008. Ready, Set, Science! Washington:
Academy Press. National Academies Press.
NRC. 1992. Responsible Science, Volume I: NRC. 2009a. A New Biology for the 21st
Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Century. Washington: National Academies
Process. Washington: National Academy Press.
Press.

NRC. 2009b. Responsible Research with Engineering. Washington: National

Biological Select Agents and Toxins. Academies Press.
Washington: National Academies Press. NRC. 2012b. A Framework for K-12 Science
NRC. 2009c. On Being a Scientist, 3rd ed. Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts,
Washington: National Academies Press. and Core Ideas. Washington: National
NRC. 2009d. The 2nd International Forum on Academies Press.
Biosecurity: Report of an International NSABB (National Science Advisory Board for
Meeting, Budapest, Hungary, March 30- Biosecurity). 2007. Proposed Framework for
April 2, 2008. Washington, D.C.: National the Oversight of Dual Use Life Sciences
Academies Press. Research: Strategies for Minimizing the
NRC. 2010. Research at the Intersection of the Potential Misuse of Research Information.
Physical and Life Sciences. Washington: Available at http://oba.od.nih.gov/
National Academies Press. biosecurity/pdf/Framework%20for%20trans
NRC. 2011a. Guide for the Care and Use of mittal%200807_Sept07.pdf.
Laboratory Animals, 8th ed. Washington: NSABB. 2008. Strategic Plan for Outreach and
National Academies Press. Education on Dual Use Issues. Available at
NRC. 2011b. Life Sciences and Related Fields: http://oba.od.nih.gov/biosecurity/biosecurity_
Trends Relevant to the Biological Weapons documents.html; accessed March 11, 2013.
Convention. Washington: National NSABB. 2010. Enhancing Responsible Science:
Academies Press. Considerations for the Development and
NRC. 2011c. Challenges and Opportunities for Dissemination of Codes of Conduct for Dual
Education about Dual Use Issues in the Life Use Research. Available at http://oba.od.nih.
Sciences. Washington: National Academies gov/oba/biosecurity/documents/COMBINED
Press. _Codes_PDFs.pdf.
NRC. 2011d. Promising Practices in NSF (National Science Foundation). 2009.
Undergraduate Science, Technology, Responsible Conduct of Research: NSF's
Engineering, and Mathematics Education: Implementation of Section 7009 of the
Summary of Two Workshops. Washington: America COMPETES Act. Federal Register
National Academies Press. 74(160), 42126-42128. Available at
NRC. 2011e. Research in the Life Sciences with www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-08-
Dual Use Potential: An International Faculty 20/html/E9-19930.htm.
Development Project on Education about The Nuremberg Code. 1949. Trials of War
the Responsible Conduct of Science. Criminals before the Nuremberg Military
Washington: National Academies Press. Tribunals under Control Council Law No.
NRC. 2012a. Discipline-Based Education 10, Vol. 2. Washington: U.S. Government
Research: Understanding and Improving Printing Office, pp. 181-182. Available at
Learning in Undergraduate Science and

References 93
www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html; institute to improve biology education at

accessed February 27, 2013. research universities. Science 324:470-471.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation Pfund, C., S. House, P. Asquith, K. Spencer, K.
and Development). 2004. Promoting Silet, and C. Sorkness. 2012. Mentor
responsible stewardship in the biosciences: Training for Clinical and Translational
Avoiding potential abuse of research and Researchers. New York: W.H. Freeman &
resources. Chairman’s summary. Available Co.
at www.oecd.org/sti/futures/long- Plionis, E. 2007. It’s All the Little Things: How
termtechnologicalsocietalchallenges/3385556 Misdemeanors in Scientific Misconduct Are
1.pdf; accessed March 11, 2013. as Bad as Fabrication and Falsification.
OECD. 2007. OECD Best Practice Guidelines on Available at http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/
Biosecurity for BRCs (Biological Resource exchange/node/1636.
Centers). Paris. Presidential Commission for the Study of
OECD. 2009. The Bioeconomy to 2030: Bioethical Issues. 2011. “Ethically
Designing a Policy Agenda. Paris. Available Impossible”: STD Research in Guatemala
at www.oecd.org/futures/long- from 1946 to 1948. Washington.
termtechnologicalsocietalchallenges/thebioeco Prince, M. 2004. Does active learning work? A
nomyto2030designingapolicyagenda.htm; review of the research. Journal of
accessed February 27, 2013. Engineering Education 93(3).
ORI (Office of Research Integrity). 2000. Rappert, B. 2003. Coding ethical behavior: The
Announcement of Final PHS Policy on challenges of biological weapons. Science
Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of and Engineering Ethics 9(4):453-470.
Research. Notice OD-01-007. Available at Available at http://projects.exeter.ac.uk/
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/Notice- codesofconduct/Publications/S&EE.htm.
files/NOT-OD-01-007.html; accessed June 4, Rappert, B., ed. 2010. Education and Ethics in
2013. the Life Sciences: Strengthening the
PCAST (President’s Council of Advisors for Prohibition of Biological Weapons.
Science and Technology). 2012. Engage to Canberra: The Australian National
Excel: Producing One Million Additional University E Press.
College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Rappert, B., and C. McLeish, eds. 2007. A Web
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. of Prevention: Biological Weapons, Life
Washington. Sciences and the Governance of Research.
Pfund, C., S. Miller, K. Brenner, P. Bruns, A. London: Earthscan.
Chang, D. Ebert-May, A. Fagen, J. Gentile, S. Reverby, S.M. 2011. “Normal exposure” and
Gossens, I. Khan, J.B. Labov, C.M. inoculation syphilis: A PHS “Tuskegee”
Pribbenow, L. Tong, R. Wright, W.B. Wood, doctor in Guatemala. Journal of Policy
and J.A. Handelsman. 2009. Summer History 23(1):6-28.

Revill, J. 2009. Biosecurity and Bioethics Institute for Science Education, University
Education: A Case Study of the UK Context. of Wisconsin. Available at http://www.wcer.
Bradford, UK: Bradford Disarmament wisc.edu/archive/cl1/cl/resource/scismet.htm;
Research Centre. accessed June 17, 2013.
Revill, J., and G. Mancini. 2008. Investigation Steneck, N.H., and R.E. Bulger. 2007. The
into the Biosecurity Content of European history, purpose, and future of instruction in
Life Science Degree Courses. Como, Italy: the responsible conduct of research.
Landau Network Centro Volta and Bradford Academic Medicine 82:829-824.
Disarmament Research Centre. Stetson, N.E. 2009. Using small-group
Revill, J., G. Mancini, M. Minehata, and N. development to facilitate cooperative
Shinomiya. 2009. Biosecurity Education: learning base groups. In J.L. Cooper, P.
Surveys from Europe and Japan. Bradford, Robinson, and D. Ball, eds. Small Group
UK: Bradford Disarmament Research Instruction in Higher Education: Lessons
Centre. from the Past, Visions of the Future.
Rickards, T., and Moger, S.T. 1999. Handbook Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press Inc.
for Creative Team Leaders. Brookfield, VT: Thornton, R.K. 2008. Effective learning
Gower. environments for computer supported
Rotblat, J. 1999. A Hippocratic Oath for instruction in the physics classroom and
scientists. Science 286:1475. laboratory. In: Connecting Research in
Royal Society and Wellcome Trust. 2004. Do No Physics Education with Teacher Education,
Harm: Reducing the Potential for the Misuse M. Vicentini and E. Sassi, eds. International
of Life Science Research. Available at Commission on Physics Education [online].
www.wellcome.ac.uk/stellent/groups/ Available at web.phys.ksu.edu/icpe/
corporatesite/@policy_communications/docu Publications/teach2/Thornton.pdf; accessed
ments/web_document/wtx023408.pdf. June 17, 2013.
Royal Society. 2006. Report of the RS-IAP-ICSU Tucker, J.B., and R. Zilinskas. 2006. The promise
International Workshop on Science and and perils of synthetic biology. The New
Technology Developments Relevant to the Atlantis 12(1):25-45.
Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. Tuckman, B. 1965. Developmental sequence in
RS Policy Document no. 38(06). small groups. Psychological Bulletin
Royal Society. 2012. Neuroscience, conflict, and 63(6):384-399.
security. Brain Waves Module 3. London. UNESCO (United Nations Educational,
Science. 2012. H5N1: Special section. 336:1522- Scientific and Cultural Organization). 1999.
1547. Declaration on Science and the Use of
Springer, L., M. Stanne, and S. Donovan. 1997. Scientific Knowledge. World Conference on
Measuring the Success of Small-Group Science, Budapest, Hungary, June 26-July 1.
Learning in College-Level SMET Teaching: Available at
A Meta-Analysis. Madison: National

References 95
www.unesco.org/science/wcs/eng/declaration Geneva. Available at www.who.int/csr/

_e.htm; accessed February 27, 2013. resources/publications/biosafety/WHO_CDS
UN (United Nations). 2004. A More Secure _CSR_LYO_2004_11/en/; accessed February
World: Our Shared Responsibility. Report of 27, 2013.
the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges WHO. 2005. Life Science Research:
and Change. New York: United Nations. Opportunities and Risks for Public Health.
van Aken, J. 2006. When risk outweighs benefit: Geneva. Available at www.who.int/csr/
Dual-use research needs a scientifically resources/publications/deliberate/WHO_CDS
sound risk–benefit analysis and legally _CSR_LYO_2005_20.pdf.
binding biosecurity measures. EMBO WHO. 2006. Biorisk Management: Laboratory
Reports 7(SI):S10–S13. doi: Biosecurity Guidance. Geneva. Available at
10.1038/sj.embor.7400726. www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/bios
Wakefield, A.J., S.H. Murch, A. Anthony, J. afety/WHO_CDS_EPR_2006_6/en/; accessed
Linnell, D.M. Casson, M. Malik, M. February 27, 2013.
Berelowitz, A.P. Dhillon, M.A. Thompson, WHO. 2007. Scientific Working Group on Life
P. Harvey, A. Valentine, S.E. Davies, J.A. Science Research and Global Health
Walker-Smith. 1998. Ileal-lymphoid- Security: Report of the First Meeting.
nodular hyperlasia, non-specific colitis, and Geneva. Available at
pervasive developmental disorder in www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/delib
children [early report]. Lancet erate/WHO_CDS_EPR_2007_4; accessed
351(9103):637-641. February 27, 2013.
WAME (World Association of Medical Editors). WHO. 2010. WHO Biorisk Management
2013. Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Advanced Trainer Programme: Concept
Journals. Available at www.wame.org/ Sheet. Photocopy.
resources/ethics-resources/publication-ethics- WHO. 2013. Report of the WHO Informal
policies-for-medical-journals/; accessed June Consultation on Dual Use Research of
17, 2013. Concern, Geneva, Switzerland, 26-28
Wheelis, M., L. Rózsa, and M. Dando. 2006. February 2013. Geneva. Available at
Deadly Cultures: Biological Weapons Since www.who.int/csr/durc/durc_feb2013_full_mt
1945. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University g_report.pdf, accessed May 14, 2013.
Press. Wiggins, G., and J. McTighe. 1998.
White House. 2012. National Bioeconomy Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA:
Blueprint. Available at www.whitehouse.gov/ Association for Supervision and Curriculum
sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/national_bi Development.
oeconomy_blueprint_april_2012.pdf; Wiggins, G., and McTighe, J. 2005.
accessed April 30, 2013. Understanding by Design, Expanded 2nd ed.
WHO (World Health Organization). 2004. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Publishing.
Laboratory Biosafety Manual, 3rd ed.

WMA (World Medical Association). 2008. Report: Options for Limiting the
WMA Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Contribution of the Open Scientific
Principles for Research Involving Human Literature to the Biological Weapons Threat.
Subjects. Available at www.wma.net/en/ Available at www.hsdl.org/?view&did=
30publications/10policies/b3/; accessed 718535; accessed February 27, 2013.
February 27, 2013. Zimmerman, B.J., and D.H. Schunk. 2001. Self-
World Science Forum. 2011. Declaration of the regulated learning and academic
Budapest World Science Forum 2011 on a achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd
New Era of Global Science. Text adopted by ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
the 5th Budapest World Science Forum on Associates Publishers.
19 November 2011 (definitive version). Zoller, U. 1993. Are lecture and learning
Available at www.easac.eu/fileadmin/ compatible? Maybe for LOCS; Unlikely for
docs/WSF/WSF_Declaration_draft_19Nov_d HOCS. Journal of Chemical Education
istribution.pdf; accessed February 27, 2013. 70(3):195.
Zilinskas, R.A., and J.B. Tucker. 2002. Workshop

Glossary
Active learning instruction: combination of Biological Weapons Convention (BWC):

methods of instruction in which students are disarmament treaty signed in 1972 that prohibits
actively engaged in learning. the development and stockpiling of biological
Alignment: ensuring that methods of active and toxin weapons, along with the means of
learning – including activities and assessments - their weaponization and delivery. The BWC was
will help students meet learning goals. the first international agreement to ban an entire
class of weapons.
Assessments: methods and tools for gauging
progress toward and achievement of the learning Biosafety: “the containment principles,
goals. Often categorized as formative and technologies and practices that are implemented
summative (see definitions below). to prevent unintentional exposure to pathogens
and toxins or their accidental release” (WHO,
ALLEA: All European Academies, is a network
2006:iii).
of national academies of sciences and of
humanities from Western, Central, and Eastern Biosecurity: “the protection, control and
Europe. The current membership comprises 53 accountability for valuable biological
academiese from 40 countries; for more materials[including information] … within
information see laboratories in order to prevent their
http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=2128 unauthorized access, loss, theft, misuse,
1. diversion or intentional release” (WHO,
2006:iii).
Baby-boomers: people born between 1946 and
1964. Biosecurity Engagement Program (BEP): U.S.
State Department Program “committed to
Backward design (reverse design): design of
developing cooperative international programs
instructional materials and plans by first setting
that promote the safe, secure and responsible use
the learning goals, then determining what
of biological materials that are at risk of
outcomes would reflect the attainment of those
accidental release or intentional misuse”
goals, and finally designing the aligned activities
(http://www.bepstate.net/).
and assessments that will enable the
accomplishment of the learning goals. Bloom’s taxonomy: the six levels of cognition
that represent a continuum of increasingly more
Bioethics: the discussion of controversial ethical
conceptual learning tasks: knowledge,
practices brought about by advances in biology
comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis
and medicine.
and evaluation.
Biological containment: the combination of
Code of Conduct: scientific organizations as
safety and security measures used to ensure that
well as governments have or support codes of
microorganisms capable of infection do not
conduct as one way to establish and promote
escape the research laboratory.
responsible conduct, “thereby reducing threats
97

associated with malign misuse of science, Formative assessment: ongoing informal, low-
particularly areas associated with modern stakes methods to provide information to both
biotechnology” (Rappert, 2003). learners and instructors about next steps during
Cognition: mechanisms that the brain uses to the learning process.
acquire and process knowledge and analyze Generation X: people born between early 1960s
information. and the early 1990s.
Cognitive science: the scientific discipline of the Higher order cognitive skills (HOCS): complex
study of cognition. judgment skills involving analysis, evaluation
Data fabrication: the presentation or and creation of new knowledge (i.e., synthesis)
publication of data that have not been generated as opposed to lower order cognitive skills
through legitimate scientific processes or that (LOCS), or the learning of facts and concepts.
are not supported by experimental results. LOCS typically correspond to the levels 1 -3 of
Bloom's Taxonomy while HOCS correspond to
Data falsification: manipulation of data in any
levels 4-6 of Bloom's Taxonomy.
way that changes or omits data.
Human Genome Project: international
DBER: discipline-based education research, a
scientific project with the primary goal of
collection of related research fields that study
determining the entire DNA sequence (specific
how students learn the knowledge, concepts, and
base pairs) and the estimated 20,000-25,000
practices of a particular discipline.
genes encoded by those base pairs, on the 23
Dual use dilemma: The problem that arises in chromosomes of a human genome.
the life and other sciences because the same line
IAC: The InterAcademy Council, representing
of research could have the potential for great
all of the world’s science academies, “reports on
benefits but also for yielding knowledge, tools,
scientific, technological, and health issues related
or techniques that could be used to cause
to the great global challenges of our time,
deliberate harm.
providing knowledge and advice to national
Dual use research: research intended for governments and international organizations”
beneficial purposes that could nonetheless be (IAC in Brief [online]. Available at:
misused for malevolent purposes. http://www.interacademycouncil.net/23450/2779
Dual use research of concern: “Research that, 9.aspx).
based on current understanding, can be IAP—The Global Network of Sciences
reasonably anticipated to provide knowledge,
Academies: as one of its core activities IAP,
products, or technologies that could be directly
which now includes over 105 national science
misapplied to pose a threat to public health and
academies, “works closely with its member
safety, agricultural crops and other plants,
academies to strengthen the role that science
animals, the environment, or materiel” (NSABB,
plays in society and to advise public officials on
2007).
the scientific aspects of critical global issues”
European Science Foundation (ESF): 72 (About IAP [online] Available at:
member organizations dedicated to scientific http://www.interacademies.net/About.aspx).
research from 30 European countries comprise
International Committee of Medical Journal’s
the European Science Foundation; for more
(ICJME) Uniform Requirements for
information, see http://www.esf.org/.
Manuscripts: set of guidelines produced by the
ICJME for standardizing the ethics, preparation

Glossary 99
and formatting of manuscripts submitted to NIH: The National Institutes of Health, agency
biomedical journals. of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Jigsaw exercise: cooperative learning strategy Services and the primary U.S. government
that enables each student of a “home” group to agency responsible for biomedical and health-
specialize in one aspect of a learning unit and related research.
then instruct and guide the other members of National Science Advisory Board for
the home group. Each member of the group is Biosecurity (NSABB): “a US. Federal
essential to the completion of the unit. government advisory committee chartered to
Knowledge construction: learning theory provide advice, guidance, and leadership
developed by the education philosopher David regarding biosecurity oversight of dual use
Ausubel that proposes that learning builds upon research” (http://oba.od.nih.gov/biosecurity/
and accommodates the experience of the learner, about_nsabb.html).
who integrates new knowledge into a personal NSF: The National Science Foundation, a U.S.
framework or scaffold based upon those government agency that supports fundamental
experiences. research and education in all the non-medical
Learning gains: “the percentage (or fraction) of fields of science and engineering.
the possible improvement that was actually OECD: Organization for Economic Cooperation
achieved by students from pre to post-test, i.e., and Development, an international organization
<g> = (Post - Pre)/(Perfect Score - Pre) x 100” dedicated to helping governments tackle the
(Thornton, 2008). economic, social, and governance challenges of a
Learning goals: what students will know, globalised economy.
understand and be able to do by the end of an ORI: Office of Research Integrity, one of the
instructional unit. bodies concerned with research integrity in the
Lower order cognitive skills (LOCS): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
knowledge questions that require simple recall Plagiarism: appropriation of the ideas, language
of information or simple application of known or expression of another. The precise
theory or concept; problems that can be solved delineation of an act of plagiarism is unclear and
without necessarily being understood. is considered culturally defined by some,
MENA region: Middle East—North Africa although scientific standards with respect to
region. publications and data do exist.
Meta-analysis: systematic method of integrating Recombinant DNA (rDNA): the transfer of
data from a number of studies addressing the DNA sequences from one organism to another
same problem. by splicing or transplantation
Metacognition: the process by which learners Reverse-design: see backward design.
are aware of their levels of learning and, through Risk: the potential that an activity or action may
that recognition, set learning goals, design lead to a loss or some undesirable outcome.
approaches to achieve them, and monitor and Risk/benefit: the comparison of the risk of an
evaluate progress towards the goals. action, activity or situation with its benefit.
Millennial generation: people born between late Scaffolding: the framework of experience that
1970s and the early 2000s. learners use to organize and integrate new
information in the process of knowledge

construction and that instructors can provide to Transmissibility: the ability of an infectious
support learning. agent to be passed from one host to another and
Science of learning: research that seeks to cause disease.
understand learning at many levels of scientific Transmissionism: the tendency towards a more
inquiry, including physiology, neurology, conventional, teacher-centered mode of
psychiatry, psychology, cognition, sociology, instruction, with knowledge meant to be
developmental biology and genetics. transmitted from teacher to pupil with little to
Scientific teaching: the pedagogical approach to no active learning methods involved.
the teaching of science that uses active learning UNESCO: United Nations Educational,
methods and aligned assessments to measure Scientific and Cultural Organization, a body
learning with the same rigor as scientific within the UN that encourages international
research. peace and universal respect by promoting
Soft law: “In the context of international law, collaboration among nations.
soft law refers to guidelines, policy declarations WHO: World Health Organization, a specialized
or codes of conduct which set standards of UN agency that is concerned with promoting
conduct. However, they are not directly international public health.
enforceable” (http://definitions.uslegal.
com/s/soft-law/).
STEM: acronym for fields of study in the
categories of science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics.
Summative assessment: evaluation of student
learning at the end of an instructional unit; such
measures of accountability are generally used as
part of the grading process.
Synthetic biology: “the design and re-design of
biological parts, devices and systems”
(http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/systemsbiology).
Synthetic DNA: artificially created strands of
DNA made in the laboratory; the structure of the
building blocks of DNA (4 bases with sugar and
phosphates attached) are well understood and
can be created de novo in the laboratory with
increasing speed and lower cost.
Think, Pair, Share: activities that pose a
question and allow students to consider the
problem alone before discussing it with a
classroom neighbor and then presenting
conclusions to the class as a whole.

Appendix A
Recommendations from Challenges and Opportunities for
Education about Dual Use Issues in the Life Sciences
This text is taken directly from NRC. 2011c. practices and lessons learned as the scope and
Challenges and Opportunities for Education scale of education about dual use issues expands.
about Dual Use Issues in the Life Sciences. The committee’s conclusions with regard to
Washington: National Academies Press, pp. 8- these issues are:
10.
 Additional materials are needed that
will be relevant to diverse audiences in
SELECTED CONCLUSIONS many parts of the world, as well as
those to at different educational stages,
Educational Materials and Methods in different fields within the life
sciences, and in related research
The discussions during the workshop made clear communities. A number of good
that, beyond the available online resources, resources have been developed, but
additional educational materials and resources there is a need for more that are
are needed if discussions of research with dual relevant to research related, for
use potential are to be incorporated more widely example, to plants or animals and to
and effectively into education programs for life fields that are not as obviously
scientists around the world. Participants at the security-related.
workshop addressed questions on the suggested  More materials are needed in
content of these materials, the types of teaching languages other than English. This will
methods that would be effective in presenting be particularly important in
them, and the opportunities for developing undergraduate settings or when used
materials more collaboratively and as part of technical training (i.e.,
disseminating them more widely. One of the biosafety).
recurring themes in the discussion was that “no  In addition to online resources,
one size fits all,” given the diversity of fields,
materials such as CDs or DVDs that
interests, and experiences across the life sciences.
can provide comparable opportunities
The key is making the issue relevant to students
for engaged learning are needed for
and this requires a tailored approach. At the
areas that lack the sustained access or
same time, participants also stressed the
importance of finding ways to share successful
101

102 Appendix A
capacity to take full advantage of web-

based materials. Implementing Education about Dual Use
 Providing widespread access to Issues: Practical Considerations
materials that could be adapted for
specific contexts or applications A recurring theme during the workshop
through open access repositories or was the variety of settings in which content
resource centers would be important about dual use issues could be introduced. This
to implementing and sustaining reflected the diversity of the participants and the
education about dual use issues. conditions in which education about dual use
 Given current technology, it would be issues is currently taking place. It also led to
feasible to create the capacity to discussions of a range of needs and challenges
develop materials through online that are reflected in the committee’s conclusions.
collaborations, as part of or in
partnership with repositories or  Incorporating education about dual
resource centers. Online collaborative use issues into the channels through
tools can be a key mechanism to which life scientists already receive
facilitate global participation in the their exposure to issues of responsible
development of materials, although conduct—biosafety, bioethics and
again issues of access to the Internet research ethics, and RCR—offers the
will need to be considered in designing greatest opportunity to reach the
any arrangements. largest and most diverse range of
 Developing methods and capacity for students and professionals. Biosafety
the life sciences and educational training reaches those with the most
communities to comment on and vet capabilities, knowledge, and
education materials, such as an motivation relevant to dual use. In
appropriately monitored Wikipedia addition, biosafety may be of
model, would be important. Another particular interest for developing
important capacity would be the countries that are attempting to raise
ability to share lessons learned and their overall standards of laboratory
best practices about materials and practices. Ethics and RCR are more
teaching strategies as experience with general and may reach more people.
education about dual use issues The available evidence suggests that
expands. If appropriate resources are the use of multiple channels is already
available, both this and the previous the most common approach.
conclusion should be well within the  If the approach above is taken, then
capacity of current online growing interest in expanding
technologies. education about dual use issues, such
 Teaching strategies need to focus on as a proposal under consideration with
active learning and clear learning the U.S. government to require such
objectives, while allowing for local education for all federally funded life
adaptation and application. scientists, might also be an

Appendix A 103
opportunity to expand more general RECOMMENDATIONS

education about responsible conduct.
 It will be important to reach out to General Approach
other disciplines that are increasingly
part of life sciences research—physical An introduction to dual use issues should be
sciences, mathematics, and part of the education of every life scientist.
engineering—as part of education  Except in specialized cases (particular
about dual use issues. There may also research or policy interests), this education
be useful ideas and lessons from how should be incorporated within broader
these fields provide education about coursework and training rather than via
ethical issues and the potential for stand-alone courses. Appropriate channels
misuse of scientific results. include biosafety, bioethics and research
 Training opportunities to help faculty ethics, and professional standards (i.e.,
develop the skills, abilities and RCR), as well as inclusion of examples of
knowledge needed to teach dual use research with dual use potential in general
issues effectively are essential if life sciences courses.
education about dual use issues is to  Insights from research on learning and
expand successfully. effective teaching should inform
 There are several promising models for development of materials, and approaches
“train-the-trainer” programs on which to teaching students and preparing faculty.
to draw, but a common characteristic
is the use of the experience to create a Specific Actions
network among faculty to support and
sustain each other and to encourage Achieving the broad goal of making dual use
expanded education. issues part of broader education will require a
 It is important to consider appropriate number of specific actions. They may be
approaches to assessment and undertaken separately by different organizations
evaluation of education about dual use but there will be substantial benefit if there is an
issues early in the process of effort to coordinate across the initiatives and
developing and implementing new share successful practices and lessons learned.
courses and modules. Resources will be needed to ensure that the
 In addition to a lack of awareness of initiatives are carried out at an appropriate scale
and engagement in dual use issues and scope.
among life scientists, there are a The workshop participants and the
number of obstacles to any effort to committee did not explore the implementation
implement new content or teaching of any specific recommendations in sufficient
depth to prescribe a particular mechanism or
methods, such as competition for
path forward. Instead, reflecting the diversity
space in crowded curricula, pressures
and variety of situations in which education
on students to focus on their research,
about dual use issues will be carried out, the final
and in some cases a general lack of
chapter lays out a number of options that could
support for teaching.
be used to implement each of the
recommendations below.

104 Appendix A
 Develop an international open access

repository of materials that can be
tailored to and adapted for the local
context, perhaps as a network of
national or regional repositories.
o The repository should be under the
auspices of the scientific
community rather than
governments, although support
and resources from governments
will be needed to implement the
education locally.
o Materials should be available in a
range of languages.
o Materials should interface with
existing databases and repositories
of educational materials dedicated
to science education.
o Additional case studies to address
broader segments of the life
sciences community should be
developed, with a focus on making
the case studies relevant to the
student/researcher.
 Design methods for commenting and
vetting of materials by the community
(such as an appropriately monitored
Wikipedia model) so they can be improved
by faculty, instructors and experts in
science education.
 Build networks of faculty and instructors
through train-the-trainer programs,
undertaking this effort if possible in
cooperation with scientific unions and
professional societies and associations.
 Develop a range of methods to assess
outcomes and, where possible, impact.
These should include qualitative
approaches as well as quantitative
measures, for example, of learning
outcomes.

Appendix B
The Bibliotheca Alexandrina
and
The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS), for the
Advancement of the Developing World
BIBLIOTHECA ALEXANDRINA61 renewed imagination that has inspired creative

talents from Callimachus to Lawrence Durrell.
The New Library of Alexandria [inaugurated in In addition, the past is suddenly coming alive as
2002], the New Bibliotheca Alexandrina is underwater archaeology is bringing to light the
dedicated to recapture the spirit of openness and sunken treasures of Alexandria, capturing the
scholarship of the original Bibliotheca imagination of the world with glimpses of
Alexandrina. Its mission is bygone glory.
That is the setting for the New Library of
to be a center of excellence for the Alexandria. The beautiful new building, with its
production and dissemination of knowledge, distinctive granite wall covered by the letters of
and to be a place of dialogue and all the world’s alphabets, is today a recognizable
understanding between cultures and landmark of the new Alexandria.
peoples. Before we turn to the future, it is only fitting
that we should salute all those whose vision and
It is our hope that the New Bibliotheca dreams launched this great enterprise more than
Alexandrina will be a worthy successor to the quarter-of-a-century ago, from UNESCO to the
Ancient Library of Alexandria. That great architects and engineers, and contractors, from
Library was a unique ecumenical effort of the the management of the project to the workers
human intellect and imagination, and remains who labored in the quarries, from the
engraved in the memories of all scientists and Associations of Friends of the Library all over
intellectuals to this day. the world to the eminent people who served on
The Ancient Library is undeniably the international commissions, from the generous
greatest chapter in the history of Alexandria. Government donations to the many individual
Our great city, founded by Alexander and home donations. All must be thanked for having
to Cleopatra, has had a remarkable history of brought us to this important achievement.
2300 years. It is a city of living history and The four objectives of the New Bibliotheca
Alexandrina are to be:

61
This material is taken from the “Director’s Message” on
the Library’s website (www.bibalex.org/aboutus/message 1. The window of the world on Egypt;
_en.aspx.
105

106 Appendix B
2. The window of Egypt on the world; worthy of bearing that great name. We hope it
3. An instrument for rising to the digital will indeed be “a source of pride for Egypt and
challenge; the world”.
4. A center for dialogue between peoples and Ismail Serageldin
civilizations; Librarian of Alexandria
The way forward is difficult and challenging.

The Library seeks to establish itself as an THE WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
international center of excellence. In terms of (TWAS)62
our collections strategy, we focus on: First, the
Ancient Library of Alexandria, Alexandria and TWAS is an autonomous international
Egypt; Second, the Mediterranean, the Arab organization, founded in 1983 in Trieste, Italy,
world (without duplicating other efforts by a distinguished group of scientists from the
underway) and Africa, then the rest of the world. South under the leadership of the late Nobel
In terms of thematic focus, the Bibliotheca laureate Abdus Salam of Pakistan. It was
Alexandrina’s specialized centers and officially launched by the secretary-general of
departments undertake a number of specific the United Nations in 1985.
projects and activities which complement and TWAS represents the best of science in
support one another in a coherent fashion. developing countries. Its main mission is to
These projects all contribute to the BA’s mission. promote scientific excellence and capacity in the
The means to move forward is partnering South for science-based sustainable
with many eminent institutions of learning development.
around the world, either in an ongoing manner The Academy's strength resides in the
or around specific events such as seminars, quality and diversity of its membership --
conferences and exhibitions. Equally important internationally renowned scientists elected by
to these links with eminent institutions are the their peers. TWAS Fellows, who live and work in
links to the civil society in Egypt and the world. developing countries, represent 85 percent of the
It is here that the 34 Associations of Friends of membership; TWAS Associate Fellows live and
the Library have an invaluable role to play. work in developed countries. The current
It is also challenging to link up electronically membership stands at 1073 [15 January 2013].
with the rest of world. We have already put A Council, elected every three years by
together a complex web of agreements to bring TWAS members, is responsible for the
the marvels of the digital age to all parts of Egypt Academy's broad policy and programmatic
and the region, and to bring the fruits of directions. The Secretariat, headed by an
Egyptian creativity and scholarship to the new executive director and located on the premises of
digital world of instant communications and the Abdus Salam International Centre for
electronic publishing. Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy, assists the
Supported by the Council of Patrons, guided
by the Board of Trustees, and in constant touch
with the Friends of the Library of Alexandria, in
62
The material is taken from the TWAS website
Egypt and all over the world, the staff of the (http://twas.ictp.it/about/whats-twas). The new name of the
Bibliotheca Alexandrina are moving forward to organization, formerly the Third World Academy of
build, over the years to come, an institution Sciences and then briefly TWAS, the academy of sciences
for the developing world, was adopted in September 2012.

Appendix B 107
Council in the administration and coordination InterAcademy Medical Panel). The Academy
of the programmes. also maintains close ties with academies,
In 1991, the United Nations Educational, research councils and ministries of science and
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) technology in developing countries.
assumed responsibility for administering TWAS
funds and personnel on the basis of an Objectives
agreement signed by TWAS and UNESCO. In  Recognize, support and promote excellence
2004, the Italian government passed a law that in scientific research in the developing
ensures a continuous financial contribution to world;
the Academy's operation. Representatives of the  Respond to the needs of young scientists in
Italian government and UNESCO are members S&T-lagging developing countries;
of the TWAS Steering Committee, which meets  Promote South-South and South-North
annually to discuss financial matters. cooperation in science, technology and
In addition to its strong links with UNESCO innovation;
and ICTP, TWAS provides administrative  Encourage scientific research and sharing of
support for the Organization of Women in experiences in solving major problems
Science for the Developing World, IAP—The facing developing countries.
Global Network of Science Academies, and the


Appendix C
Detailed Results of the June 2011 Planning Meeting

This text is taken from the letter report of the institute to multiple regional ones (see Chapter
meeting (NRC. 2011e. Research in the Life 3). There may still be cases where an initial site
Sciences with Dual Use Potential: An visit would be helpful, for example when the
International Faculty Development Project on program begins in a new region, but the intent
Education about the Responsible Conduct of is to build a largely self-sustaining endeavor.
Science. Washington: National Academies Press,
pp. 14-19). The material has been lightly edited
to ensure that references to boxes or tables or The Workshop Itself
specific pages are appropriate for this report.
The success of the NASI program (Pfund et al.,
2009), as well as of other programs for faculty
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE development, have suggested some basic
EGYPTIAN PROTOTYPE INSTITUTE features for a workshop:
(EPI)63
 In person. Although it is becoming
Advance planning. Since this is a new endeavor increasingly feasible to create and sustain
for the National Research Council (NRC), the virtual networks using resources such as
preparations for the first workshop included the videoconferencing and web 2.0
formal planning meeting and a site visit. If the communications, there is still substantial
program is successful, it is assumed that other value in bringing people together to be
countries in the MENA region will be able to immersed in a common experience.
participate in workshops hosted by the Egyptian Personal interactions also allow for informal
network as the basis for launching their own communication outside the defined
projects. The NRC may have a supporting role schedule that can be valuable to the
but there will be less hands-on involvement as network-building process.
countries gain experience and take “ownership.”  Duration. Experience from 8 years of NASIs
This is the model that the National Academies suggests that 4 to 5 day long workshops
Summer Institutes (NASI) program has would be optimal, given the amount of new
adopted as it expands from a single national material that participants would be expected
to absorb and the value of cumulative
63
This is the title adopted when it was assumed the focus learning-by-doing (see Chapter 2).
would be on a single country. With the move to a regional 3Participants would be expected to do some
approach, the title of the institute became Education in advance preparation, but the main
responsible research with infectious diseases: Ensuring safe
science in the 21st century.
109

110 Appendix C
experiences would be obtained during the The Network

meeting itself.
 Team-based. A key element for ensuring Fostering successful and sustainable networks of
success and enhancing sustainability in the faculty able to teach about dual use issues and
NASIs is the participation of teams from broader problems of responsible conduct in
institutions, preferably including a range of science and research depends on several key
junior to senior members on each team. elements, some of which have already been
Gaining buy-in from administrators is discussed earlier in this report.
critical and it has proved useful to have them
among the participants. The NASI model  From the beginning. Given the emphasis on
has shown added success and commitment forward planning, strategies for building and
by participants if their home institute sustaining the network of faculty will be part
provides at least modest resources to help of the earliest discussions of the workshop.
implement what faculty learn. As previously presented, networks will be
 Hands-on. As the design of the planning influenced by the local/national context, for
meeting suggested, the workshop would be example with regard to the degree of faculty
built around extensive, direct participation. autonomy in course design.
Participants would have the opportunity to  Resources. As mentioned above, whenever
be both “students” and “teachers,” to possible participants in the workshop will be
practice the methods they are learning, and provided with materials and other resources
to develop “teachable tidbits” and other to help them implement what they have
materials (e.g., appropriate assessments) to learned. Modest resources from their home
help them implement their new courses or institution to show its commitment and
modules at their home institutions. obligation may be particularly desirable in
 Implementation and Assessment. An the project’s initial stages. It is the existence
important feature of the workshop’s hands- and ready availability of these resources
on approach is the commitment to assist rather than their amount that matters most;
participants in implementing what they have in many situations modest resources can
learned. In addition to implementing new have a significant impact.
ideas or courses, they will acquire experience  Continuing connections. Another way to
and resources to plan and carry out effective help build a network is to have project staff
assessments of whether the learning goals of from the sponsoring organization available
their new activities are being met. As already for consultation to participants after the
mentioned in the context of sustainability, workshop as they implement their new ideas
thinking about assessment from the outset is (courses, modules, etc.). These connections
helpful on multiple levels. Examples of would reinforce rather than substitute for
useful assessment techniques include local commitment.
observation of the participants, collecting  Appraisal. The NASI arranges for at least
and analyzing work samples, introducing some of the team members to get together
checklists of skills, use of quizzes and/or self- approximately six months after the Institute
assessment tools, interviews, etc. to share experiences and challenges,
reinforce ties, and make plans and
adjustments. This is always important but is

Appendix C 111
particularly critical in the early days of a It also reflects the sensitivities to concepts such
long-term project, i.e., the first years of as dual use and biosecurity under current
implementation. The anticipation of a conditions in Egypt; it is unclear whether other
reunion may also encourage participants to workshops in other settings would experience
persevere with applying their new skills, the same concerns as strongly.64
since it should be expected that, in spite of
resources and support, at least some of them Goals of the EPI
would encounter barriers or become
discouraged. Expanding on the themes previously discussed,
the following three are the goals to achieve by
the faculty workshop:
DETAILS OF THE EGYPTIAN PROTOTYPE
INSTITUTE GOALS AND LEARNING 1. Understand the ethical and legal
OBJECTIVES responsibilities of physical and life scientists.
The existence of multinational and
The syllabus (e.g., content and pedagogy) of the multidisciplinary perspectives on what
institute is developed in close consultation with constitutes responsible life sciences research
the faculty in whose country it will take place. makes a discussion on the various norms
The elements described below have been and cultures of the practice of science very
adapted to the needs identified by the faculty valuable. It would also foster the idea of a
from research institutions in Egypt. global science and research community,
Consequently, these may have to be modified to although the amount of legal information
best fit the characteristics of each country. necessary is a matter of discussion. At the
During the planning meeting in Trieste, the end of the workshop the participants will
general themes of the EPI were identified but the have a clearer appreciation of responsible
detailed content was not discussed. This is one conduct in research and science.
of the tasks that the Committee overseeing this 2. Educate participants in the conduct of
project is working on in close collaboration with responsible science. The workshop will foster
the experts from Egypt who took part in the good practice in teaching life and physical
planning meeting. sciences and teach participants to adapt
these to their own subject matters. At the
The Importance of the Workshop’s Title end of the workshop the participants will
have an appreciation for active learning
In the planning meeting a substantial amount of techniques as these apply to responsible
time was devoted to selecting an appropriate title scientific practices, they will be able to utilize
for the future Institute. While the chosen title the teaching methods of the workshop, and
reflects the core interests of the planners, it was to incorporate the workshop materials into
mostly shaped by the Egyptian experts. It is existing programs in their own institutions.
aspirational and evokes the notions of education; 3. Cultivate future leaders in responsible science
responsible research; infectious diseases (or and research integrity. In order to sustain the
other life science); and safety in science:
Education in responsible research with infectious 64
See NRC (2011c) and Rappert (2010) for accounts of the
diseases ensuring safe science in the 21st century. experiences of programs on dual use issues in other
countries.

112 Appendix C
impetus for this project and foster a sense of  A new course on responsible conduct
achievement and dignity the workshop of research (this may take a long time
participants will be encouraged to not only for approval, depending on the
develop good research practices but to national structure of education
identify the necessary support system to curricula in a country)
facilitate such changes. In the formative  Incorporation of new teaching
years of the project, the accomplishments of methods within existing courses in the
the site visit and the guidance of the NRC life sciences adding the elements of
Committee members will be crucial to RCR/RI teaching
identify champions and to foster the
exchange of scientists around the world to At the end of the project a meeting of the
sustain this effort. EPI participants, Committee members and
project staff will take place to measure success,
An example of how to structure the activities at discuss challenges and new activities to be
the institute using a learning outcomes approach undertaken (this also happens with the NASI).
is shown in Table C-1. While no specific assessment tool has been
designed, oral deliberations –especially during
Activities and Assessments the formative years of the project- between
participants are thought to be the most helpful
There are numerous activities to choose from to assessment tool. It is possible that, following the
implement what was learned at the EPI at each completion of the EPI and the debriefing
participant’s home institution. The choices meeting a few months later, the Committee will
could be influenced by what integrates well formulate guidelines on data to be collected
within a laboratory, a department or an from participants and analyzed in the footsteps
institution and what is commonly used and of the NASI.
accepted in a country’s educational system.
Pfund and colleagues have described a number Costs and Implementation Issues
of activities originating from the 6 years of
Summer Institutes (Pfund et al. 2009), and Although these are important issues, they can
below are some additional examples: only be addressed after the EPI has taken place.
 Brown bag seminars

Appendix C 113
TABLE C-1 Example of a “Learning Outcomes” approach.

Activity that
General goals Specific learning Types of assessments accomplishes that
addressed objectives/outcomes that measure objective specific objective
Participants will be Develop a teaching module Develop an assessment Present your
advocates for teaching to illustrate the use of the instrument that will approach to your
responsible conduct of concepts of responsible demonstrate the colleagues in the
research and practice conduct of research. student’s ability to use Institute and obtain
of science. the concepts you have their feedback.
discussed to solve
practical problems.
Use a historical case
study to engage students
and deepen their
awareness of the various
issues.
Participants will have Identify the difference Tested knowledge; pre- Group activities, small
an awareness of between chemical and and postassessment. group discussions,
hazards in the biological hazards. clicker questions.
Offer a problem and ask
laboratory and know
Be able to describe students to describe any Expertise sharing
how to bring that
biosafety guidelines and obvious hazardous (own experiences of
awareness to others.
standards of practice to situations. best practice; own
prospective trainees stories of not-so-best
practices).
Appreciate the ethical, Indentify polices and Convey these policies to Locate and
legal, and social guidelines and regulatory the workers/students in read/discuss these
responsibilities of life statements of both their native language. guidelines with the
scientists. international and local group.
Critique and discuss
bodies and critique the
how these apply to Discuss cases from
applicability of these
participants’ own historical examples
statements.
experience, laboratory, (e.g., Thomas Butler).
Able to write standards of institution, or country.
Discuss case studies
practice for their own
specific to the group
institution, department, or
itself, e.g., based on
laboratory.
personal experience.


Appendix D
Active Learning Toolkit and Images
This appendix contains materials intended to active learning concepts and applications;
illustrate and supplement the discussions of  Projects and resources devoted to promoting
active learning in the text of the report. It active learning in science education; and
includes:  References to research on the science of
learning, expanded from the references cited
 Images, including cartoons, that illustrate in the text.
USEFUL IMAGES
The transmissionist view of learning
• Learners are empty
vessels to be filled
with knowledge
• Instructor‐centered
From Smith et al. 2005. Journal of Engineering Education. Used with permission.
115

116 Appendix D
The typical outcome…
Adapted from Smith et al. 2005. Journal of Engineering Education. Used with permission.
The constructivist view of learning
• People must grow their own knowledge structure from
experience
– we cannot put knowledge into students’ heads
Learner‐centered!

Appendix D 117
Moving from an instructor‐centered
to a learner‐centered classroom
Begin with this As a table, sketch what
drawing . . . it would look like if it
were learner‐centered
5 minutes!
Adapted from Smith et al. 2005. Journal of Engineering Education. Used with permission.

PROJECTS AND RESOURCES TO IMPROVE Center for Learning and Teaching in higher
SCIENCE EDUCATION education. CIRTL uses graduate education as the
leverage point to develop a national STEM
BEN faculty committed to implementing and
advancing effective teaching practices for diverse
BiosciEdNet (BEN) Collaborative was student audiences as part of successful
established in 1999 by the American Association professional careers. The goal of CIRTL is to
for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) with 11 improve the STEM learning of all students at
other professional societies and coalitions. The every college and university, and thereby to
BEN Collaborative mission is not only to increase the diversity in STEM fields and the
provide seamless access to e-resources but to STEM literacy of the nation.
also serve as a catalyst for strengthening teaching To prepare the future STEM faculty of the
and learning in the biological sciences. BEN nation, CIRTL influences graduate-through-
resources have been reviewed by the individual faculty preparation in teaching and learning at a
societies for standards of quality and accuracy; significant number of research universities.
the collaborative establishment of its metadata Building on the CIRTL Core ideas, the project
structure permits the user to easily conduct proposes to achieve this goal through a learning
productive interdisciplinary searches across the community of diverse research universities
diverse biological sciences topics. mutually engaged in teaching-as-research
www.biosciednet.org activities.
Established in fall 2006, the CIRTL Network
BioQuest was comprised of Howard University, Michigan
State University, Texas A&M University,
The BioQUEST Curriculum Consortium University of Colorado at Boulder, University of
(BQCC) is a community of scientists, teachers, Wisconsin-Madison, and Vanderbilt University.
and learners who are interested in supporting After a substantial expansion in 2011, the
biology education that reflects realistic scientific Network now includes 25 research universities
practices. The efforts in science education build across the nation. The diversity of these
on a commitment to engaging learners in a full institutions—private/public; large/moderate
spectrum of biological inquiry from problem size; majority-/minority-serving; geographic
posing to problem solving and peer persuasion. location—is by design aligned with CIRTL’s
Many of the projects involve coordinating mission.
faculty development workshops that focus on www.cirtl.net/
strategies for bringing realistic scientific
experiences into their classrooms and MicrobeWorld
collaboratively developing curriculum projects.
http://bioquest.org/ Established in 2003, MicrobeWorld is an
interactive multimedia educational outreach
Center for the Integration of Research, initiative from the American Society for
Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) Microbiology (ASM) that promotes awareness
and understanding of key microbiological issues
The Center for the Integration of Research, to adult and youth audiences and showcases the
Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL) is an NSF significance of microbes in our lives. The various
118

Appendix D 119
outreach methods feature the process of pedagogical tools, the national context, and
discovery, historical changes in research, and a twenty-first century student education.
variety of scientific careers in industry, www.pkal.org
academia, and government.
www.microbeworld.org SENCER
MERLOT Science Education for New Civic Engagements

and Responsibilities (SENCER) was initiated in
Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning 2001 under the National Science Foundation’s
and Online Teaching (MERLOT) is a free and CCLI national dissemination track. Since then,
open online community of resources designed SENCER has established and supported an ever-
primarily for faculty, staff and students of higher growing community of faculty, students,
education from around the world to share their academic leaders, and others to improve
learning materials and pedagogy. MERLOT is a undergraduate STEM (science, technology,
leading edge, user-centered, collection of peer- engineering, and mathematics) education by
reviewed higher-education online learning connecting learning to critical civic questions.
materials, catalogued by registered members and SENCER’s goals are to: (1) get more students
a set of faculty development support services. interested and engaged in learning in science,
MERLOT’s strategic goal is to improve the technology, engineering, and mathematics
effectiveness of teaching and learning by (STEM) courses, (2) help students connect
increasing the quantity and quality of peer- STEM learning to their other studies, and (3)
reviewed online learning materials that can be strengthen students’ understanding of science
easily incorporated into faculty-designed and their capacity for responsible work and
courses. citizenship.
www.merlot.org www.senser.net
PKAL Workshop for New Physics and Astronomy

Faculty
Project Kaleidoscope (PKAL) is one of the
leading advocates in the United States for what Since 1996, the American Association of Physics
works in building and sustaining strong Teachers has sponsored workshops designed to
undergraduate programs in the fields of science, help new faculty at research and four-year
technology, engineering, and mathematics institutions understand how to become more
(STEM). As an intelligence broker within the effective educators and support their quest to
undergraduate STEM community, PKAL gain tenure. Because of the pressure to establish
disseminates resources that advance the work of their credentials in research or other scholarly
academic leaders tackling the challenging work activities, new faculty may be tempted to
of ensuring that the undergraduate STEM postpone or ignore the development of teaching
learning environment serves 21st century proficiency. They may receive direct or subtle
students, science, and society most effectively, messages suggesting that only a focus on
efficiently, and creatively. PKAL themes include research will result in career advancement, and
institutional transformation, human and there is often a lack of mentors or role models
physical infrastructure, the academic program,

120 Appendix D
who demonstrate dedication and enthusiasm Teacher Education Beyond 2000, R. Pinto
for teaching. and S. Surinach, eds. Paris: Elsevier.
Similar signals are transmitted to graduate Brewer, C., and D. Smith, eds. 2011. Vision and
students who may be in training for academic Change in Undergraduate Biology
careers. Moreover, because the research Education. Washington: American
universities include many of our large public Association for the Advancement of Science.
institutions, a large number of undergraduates Handelsman, J., S. Miller, and C. Pfund. 2006.
may suffer as a result of inadequate preparation Scientific Teaching. San Francisco: Freeman
of new faculty for teaching. and Sons.
Data suggest that this inadequate attention Knight, J.K., and W.B. Wood. 2005. Teaching
to teaching, especially in introductory science more by lecturing less. Cell Biology
and math courses, is responsible for driving Education 4:298-310.
students away from undergraduate majors in Michael, J. 2006. Where’s the evidence that
science, mathematics and engineering. active learning works? Advances in
To improve the quality of physics teaching Physiology Education 30:159-167.
on a national scale, AAPT created the New Meltzer, D., and R. Thornton. 2012. Resource
Faculty Workshop. Each workshop presents a Letter ALIP-1: Active-Learning Instruction
small number of techniques that have proven to in Physics. American Journal of Physics
be effective in a variety of environments. These 80(6):478.
tactics can be implemented with minimal time NRC (National Research Council). 2000. How
and effort, thus allowing new faculty to devote People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and
more of their attention to research and School (Expanded Edition). Washington:
scholarship. National Academy Press.
Each spring and fall, department chairs at NRC. 2003. BIO2010: Transforming
research and four-year institutions are asked to Undergraduate Education for Future
nominate tenure-track faculty in the first few Research Biologists. Washington: National
years of their initial appointment. The ideal Academies Press.
candidate would have a year or two of teaching NRC. 2004. Biotechnology Research in an Age of
experience so that they are aware of the Terrorism. Washington: National
challenges of the first year of teaching. Academies Press.
In 2002, the American Physical Society and NRC. 2006b. America’s Lab Report:
the American Astronomical Society joined with Investigations in High School Science.
AAPT to expand the reach of this program. Washington: National Academies Press.
Financial support is provided by the National NRC. 2007b. Taking Science to School.
Science Foundation. Washington: National Academies Press.
www.aapt.org/Conferences/newfaculty/nfw.cfm NRC. 2008. Ready, Set, Science! Washington:
National Academies Press.
NRC. 2009c. On Being a Scientist. Washington:
REFERENCES National Academies Press.
NRC. 2011d. Promising Practices in
Bernhard, J. 2001. Does active engagement Undergraduate Science, Technology,
curricula give long-lived conceptual Engineering, and Mathematics Education:
understanding? pp. 749-752. In: Physics

Appendix D 121
Summary of Two Workshops. Washington: Measuring the Success of Small-Group

National Academies Press. Learning in College-Level SMET Teaching:
NRC. 2011e. Research in the Life Sciences with A Meta-Analysis. Madison: National
Dual Use Potential: An International Faculty
Institute for Science Education, University
Development Project on Education about
of Wisconsin. Available at http://www.wcer.
the Responsible Conduct of Science.
Washington: National Academies Press. wisc.edu/archive/cl1/cl/resource/scismet.htm;
NRC. 2012b. A Framework for K-12 Science accessed June 17, 2013.
Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, Springer, L., M. Stanne, and S. Donovan. 1999.
and Core Ideas. Washington: National Effects of small-group learning on
Academies Press. undergraduates in science, mathematics,
Prince, M. 2004 Does active learning work? A engineering, and technology: A meta-
review of the research. Journal of analysis. Review of Educational Research
Engineering Education 93(3):223-231. 69(1):21-51.
Springer, L., M. Stanne, S. Donovan. 1999.


Appendix E
Biographies of Committee Members
and Staff
Rita R. Colwell, Chair, University of Maryland; organizations on program development and

Canon U.S. Life Sciences, Inc. governance. Before that she served for nearly 20
Rita Colwell is Chairman of Canon U.S. Life years as staff officer and division director at the
Sciences, Inc. and Distinguished University Institute of Medicine, serving as executive officer
Professor at both the University of Maryland at from 1989 to 1994.
College Park and Johns Hopkins University Dr. Bond serves on numerous board and
Bloomberg School of Public Health. Her advisory groups such as the Council of the
interests are focused on global infectious National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
diseases, water, and health, and she is currently Diseases, the Institute of Medicine Committee to
developing an international network to address Review the Clinical and Translational Science
emerging infectious diseases and water issues, Awards (CTSA) Program at the National Center
including safe drinking water for both the for Advancing Translational Science, the
developed and developing world. Dr. Colwell National Research Council Committee on
has held many advisory positions in the U.S. Developing a Framework for an International
government, nonprofit science policy Faculty Development Project on Education
organizations, and private foundations, as well about Research in the Life Sciences with Dual
as in the international scientific research Use, the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career
community. Dr. Colwell is a member of the Award for Science and Mathematics Advisory
National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Committee, and the Board of the Health Effects
Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, the Institute and the James B. Hunt Jr. Institute for
American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and Educational Leadership.
the American Philosophical Society. She holds a Dr. Bond chairs a National Academies
BS in bacteriology and an MS in genetics from Board on Developing the Capacity of African
Purdue University, and a PhD in oceanography Academies of Science, serves as a member of the
from the University of Washington. Institute of Medicine Forum on Microbial
Threats to Health, and is a frequent reviewer of
Enriqueta C. Bond, Burroughs Wellcome Fund Academy reports. She previously chaired the
Enriqueta Bond, PhD, retired in August 2008 as Institute of Medicine Clinical Research
President of the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Roundtable and was a member of the Council of
(BWF), a private foundation whose mission is to the Eunice Shriver National Institute of Child
advance the medical sciences through the Health and Human Development. Dr. Bond is a
support of research and education. She is a member of the Institute of Medicine and is a
founding partner of QE Philanthropic Advisors fellow of the Association for the Advancement of
and consults with philanthropic and nonprofit Science. She was educated at Wellesley College
123

124 Appendix E
(AB), the University of Virginia (MA), and served on numerous scientific panels and
Georgetown University, where she earned a PhD editorial boards. He currently serves on the
in genetics and molecular biology. scientific advisory boards of the Western
Regional Center for Excellence in Biodefense
John D. Clements, Tulane University Research and the PATH Enteric Vaccine
Dr. Clements is a professor of microbiology and initiative. In 2003, he was trained as a U.N.
immunology at Tulane University School of Weapons Inspector (Biologic) in the 7th United
Medicine and director of the Tulane Center for Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection
Infectious Diseases. After receiving his doctorate Commission (UNMOVIC). In 2003 and again in
in 1979 from the University of Texas Health 2004, he served as a member of the Iraq Survey
Science Center at Dallas, he completed a Group as a subject matter expert in weapons of
National Research Council Associateship at mass destruction and dual use equipment and
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research in programs.
Washington, D.C. In 1980, Dr. Clements was
appointed an assistant professor in the Nancy D. Connell, University of Medicine and
Departments of Microbiology and Medicine at Dentistry of New Jersey
the University of Rochester School of Medicine Dr. Connell is a professor in the Division of
in New York. In 1982, he joined the faculty at Infectious Disease in the Department of
Tulane University, where he has served as Medicine at the University of Medicine and
professor and chair of the Department of Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ), New Jersey
Microbiology and Immunology since 1999. He Medical School. A Harvard University PhD in
was Vice Dean for Research from 2006 to 2009 Microbiology, Dr. Connell’s major research
and in 2009 was appointed director of the focus is the interaction between respiratory
Tulane Center for Infectious Diseases. Dr. infectious agents and the macrophage. She is
Clements maintains an active research program director of the Biosafety Level Three (BSL-3)
focused on development of vaccines against Facility of UMDNJ’s Center for the Study of
infectious diseases. His research has been Emerging and Re-emerging Pathogens and
continuously funded from a variety of Public chairs the University’s Institutional Biosafety
Health Service and Department of Defense Committee. She has served on a number of
sources. He is currently Director of the National Academies committees, e.g., the
Tulane/Xavier Vaccine Development/ Committee on Advances in Technology and the
Engineering Project and the Tulane/Xavier Prevention of their Application to Next
Vaccine Peptide Program, both supported by the Generation Biowarfare Agents and the
Department of Defense. Dr. Clements is also Co- Committee to Review the Scientific Approaches
Director of the South Louisiana Institute for used in the FBI’s Investigation of the 2001
Infectious Disease Research and Co-Director of Bacillus anthracis Mailings.
the Louisiana Vaccine Center, both collaborative
projects between Tulane University and Clarissa Dirks, The Evergreen State College
Louisiana State University Health sciences Clarissa Dirks is an associate professor in
Center in New Orleans. Research in Dr. scientific inquiry, biology at the Evergreen State
Clements’s laboratory has resulted in more than College in Olympia, Washington. She earned her
100 peer-reviewed publications and book PhD in molecular and cellular biology at the
chapters, and 13 patents. Dr. Clements has University of Washington, conducting research
in virology at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer

Appendix E 125
Research Center. As a virologist she currently (IEEE) and the author/coauthor of a number of
investigates the evolution of viruses and host publications. As director of the CSSP, he
viral inhibitory proteins as well as the organizes, each year, a number of major
coevolution of bryophytes and species of conferences in the fields of science, technology,
Tardigrada. As a biology education researcher, and education.
she has implemented programs to improve
retention of underrepresented students in first- Alastair Hay, University of Leeds
year science courses, and conducted studies to Alastair Hay is professor of environmental
better understand how students acquire and toxicology in the School of Medicine at the
master science process skills. She has received University of Leeds, U.K. He holds a BSc in
two Tom Rye Harvill Awards for the Integration chemistry and PhD in biochemistry, both from
of Art and Science, has been named a National the University of London. As a toxicologist his
Academies Education Fellow and Mentor in the major interests are the effects of chemicals on
Life Sciences, and is the recipient of two Biology health but his research also covers work on
Leadership Education grants. She works to calcium metabolism, kidney damage, drugs of
provide professional development opportunities abuse, pharmacokinetics, and proteomics.
for faculty and postdoctoral scholars by serving Professor Hay currently teaches basic biology,
on the Committee for National Academies research methodology, and ethics to medical
Summer Institute on Undergraduate Education students in years 1 to 3 of their 5-year medical
in Biology, leading a Pacific Northwest Regional degree. External to the university he has been an
Summer Institute, and mentoring postdoctoral advisor to the U.K. government for over 20 years
fellows as a regional field station leader for the on both the regulation of chemicals and
Faculty Institute for Reforming Science exposure standards in the workplace; he also
Teaching. She is a member of the editorial board advises the European Union on workplace
of the journal CBE-Life Science Education and a exposure limits. He has more than 35 years’
cofounder of the Society for Biology Education experience with chemical weapons issues and
Research (SABER). advises the U.K. government on matters relating
to the implementation of the 1997 Chemical
Mohamed El-Faham, Bibliotheca Alexandrina Weapons Convention. He has developed
Mohamed El-Faham is director of the Center for teaching materials for chemists on such topics as
Special Studies and Programs (CSSP), multiple uses of chemicals; chemical weapons;
Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Egypt. He is also a and codes of conduct. Professor Hay has worked
professor and director of Power Systems Group with numerous national and international
at the Department of Electrical and Computer organizations to promote these issues in both
Control Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and the chemical and biological sciences and to help
Technology, Arab Academy for Science and find innovative teaching approaches to engage
Technology and Maritime Transport in young scientists and promote responsible
Alexandria. He received his BSc in electrical conduct in research.
engineering from the University of Alexandria
and his MSc and DSc in electrical engineering Elizabeth Heitman, Vanderbilt University
from the George Washington University, Medical Center
Washington, D.C. He is a senior member of the Dr. Heitman received her PhD from Rice
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers University in 1988. She has extensive expertise in

126 Appendix E
biomedical ethics, responsible conduct of setting global health strategies shaped the agenda
research, and ethics in public health, as well as of the IOM Forum on Microbial Threats by
experience with biodefense-related ethical tackling such topical issues as biological threats
decision making as a member of the Policy, and bioterrorism; SARS; and pandemic flu. He
Ethics, and Law Core of the Southeast Regional received an MD from the University of Cairo
Center of Excellence for Emerging Infections and a PhD from the University of London,
and Biodefense (SERCEB). Her primary research School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
addresses the evaluation of education in the
responsible conduct of research, and the cultural Mona Mostafa Mohamed, Cairo University
awareness and professional socialization of Mona Mostafa Mohamed, PhD, is professor of
students and researchers. Dr. Heitman is the cell biology and head of the Cancer Biology
director of a four-year research ethics education Research Laboratory, Faculty of Science, Cairo
program for Costa Rican biomedical researchers University. Upon completion of her doctorate at
and research ethics review committees Cairo University, she was competitively selected
sponsored by the NIH’s Fogarty International for a prestigious Avon-AACR International
Center and a member of the Clinical Research Scholar award in breast cancer research (2005-
Ethics Key Function Committee of the Clinical 2007), one of only 12 selected from several
and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hundred applicants. Dr. Mohamed’s research
Consortium. She is the coauthor of The Ethical focuses on the interactions between
Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences inflammatory macrophages and their associated
(with Drs. Ruth Ellen Bulger and Stanley Joel cytokines and proteolytic enzymes observed
Reiser). during breast cancer, with the ultimate goal of
understanding mechanisms by which
Adel A.F. Mahmoud, Princeton University macrophages induce breast cancer progression
Adel A.F. Mahmoud, MD, PhD, is a professor in and identifying novel targets for drug
molecular biology and public policy at Princeton development. Returning to Egypt in 2007, she
University, and former president of Merck was awarded start-up funds from Avon
Vaccines of Merck & Company, Inc. Before that, Foundation and Cairo University to establish the
he served at Case Western Reserve University first specified breast cancer biology laboratory in
and University Hospitals as chairman of Egypt (CBRL; www.cbrl.cu.edu.eg). CBRL’s state-
medicine and physician in chief. Dr. Mahmoud’s of-the-art equipment has enabled Dr.
academic pursuits focused on investigations of Mohamed’s group to achieve outstanding results
the determinants of infection and disease in in breast cancer research, including those of 13
human schistosomiasis and helminthic master’s and doctoral students. Dr. Mohamed is
infections. He has led efforts to develop new the recipient of numerous grants from the
vaccines for measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, Science and Technology Development Fund,
rotavirus, shingles, and human papillomavirus. Egypt; the Avon Foundation (U.S.A.) in
Dr. Mahmoud served as a member of the collaboration with New York University; the
National Science Advisory Board for Fogarty International Research Collaboration -
Biosecurity. He was elected to the Institute of Basic Biomedical (FIRCA-BB) Research Award
Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of (R03); and Wayne State University (U.S.A.). Dr.
Sciences in 1987 and has served on numerous Mohamed is a leading example for women in
committees. For example, his leadership in science, blazing a path forward for future

Appendix E 127
women seeking scientific and academic careers. Pennsylvania State University (the Alumni
She was recently selected for the 2012 Women in Association’s highest award); an honorary
Science Hall of Fame for her scientific member of Sigma Pi Sigma (its highest award),
accomplishments the physics honor society; and a National
(http://jordan.usembassy.gov/wshf_2012.html). Academies Education Mentor in the Life
Sciences. He was recognized by Science
James H. Stith, American Institute of Physics Spectrum Magazine as one of the 50 Most
James H. Stith is Vice President Emeritus for the Important Blacks in Research Science and was
American Institute of Physics (AIP). While an named a ScienceMaker by HistoryMakers.
officer of the Institute, he had oversight Additionally, he serves on a number of national
responsibilities for AIP’s Magazine Division, the and international advisory boards and has been
Media and Government Relations Division, the awarded a Doctor of Humane Letters by his
Education Division, the Center for the History alma mater, Virginia State University. He is
of Physics, the Statistical Research Division, and married and has three adult daughters and two
the Careers Division. Throughout his career, he grandchildren.
has been an advocate for programs that ensure
ethnic and gender diversity in the sciences. His National Academies Staff
doctorate in physics was earned from the
Pennsylvania State University, and his master’s Lida Anestidou is senior program officer at the
and bachelor’s in physics were received from Institute for Laboratory Animal Research of the
Virginia State University. A physics education U.S. National Academy of Sciences, where she
researcher, his primary interests are in program directs a diverse portfolio of studies on the use of
evaluation, and teacher preparation and laboratory animals; biodefense and biosecurity;
enhancement. He was formerly a professor of and research integrity/responsible conduct of
physics at the Ohio State University and research. Prior to this position she was faculty at
professor of physics at the United States Military the Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society,
Academy. A retired colonel, he was the first Vanderbilt University Medical Center. She
African American to earn tenure at the earned her doctorate in biomedical sciences
Academy. Dr. Stith has been a visiting associate from the University of Texas at Houston.
professor at the United Air Force Academy, a Working with physiologist Norman Weisbrodt,
visiting scientist at the Lawrence Livermore she explored the effects of nitric oxide on the
National Laboratory, a visiting scientist at the motility of the gastrointestinal musculature.
University of Washington, and an associate Working with research integrity expert and
engineer at the Radio Corperation of America. biomedical ethics educator Elizabeth Heitman,
He is a past president of the American she concurrently pursued her interests in
Association of Physics Teachers, past president biomedical ethics, scientific integrity, and
of the National Society of Black Physicists, a science policy. Dr. Anestidou also holds a
fellow of the American Association for the Doctor of Veterinary Medicine degree from
Advancement of Science, a fellow of the Greece (her home country) and an MS in
American Physical Society, a chartered fellow of Veterinary Sciences from the University of
the National Society of Black Physicists, and a Florida. She is an editorial board member of
member of the Ohio Academy of Science. He Science and Engineering Ethics, Lab Animal,
was named a distinguished alumnus of the and SciTech Lawyer and an ad hoc reviewer for

128 Appendix E
the American Journal of Bioethics. She is a Jay B. Labov is senior staff member of the
member of the National Conference of Lawyers National Research Council’s Center for
and Scientists. Dr. Anestidou serves as an expert Education. In this capacity, he leads an
reviewer in the Ethics Evaluation of grant institution-wide effort to leverage the National
applications to the 7th Framework Program of Academies’ work in education by helping to
the European Research Council and the make more deliberate connections between the
European Commission Directorate General work of the Center for Education, the National
Research. Academy of Sciences, National Academy of
Engineering, and the program units of the
Jo L. Husbands is a scholar/senior project National Research Council. He is the principal
director with the Board on Life Sciences of the liaison on education activities between the
U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS), program units of the National Academies and its
where she manages studies and projects to help Office of Communications, with the goal of
mitigate the risks of the misuse of scientific enhancing communication with outside
research for biological weapons or bioterrorism. stakeholders about the Academies’ work in
She represents the NAS on the Biosecurity education and the public’s understanding of
Working Group of IAP: The Global Network of science and technology. He also has been the
Science Academies, which also includes the study director for several NRC reports:
academies of Australia, China, Cuba, Egypt, Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate
India, Nigeria, Poland (chair), Russia, and the Teaching in Science, Mathematics, Engineering,
United Kingdom. From 1991 to 2005 she was and Technology (2003); Learning and
director of the NAS Committee on International Understanding: Improving Advanced Study of
Security and Arms Control (CISAC) and its Mathematics and Science in U.S. High Schools
Working Group on Biological Weapons Control. (2002); Educating Teachers of Science,
Before joining the National Academies, she Mathematics, and Technology: New Practices
worked for several Washington, D.C.-based for the New Millennium (2000); Transforming
nongovernmental organizations focused on Undergraduate Education in Science,
international security. Dr. Husbands is currently Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology
an adjunct professor in the Security Studies (1999); Serving the Needs of Pre-College Science
Program at Georgetown University. She is a and Mathematics Education: Impact of a Digital
member of the Temporary Working Group on National Library on Teacher Education and
Education and Outreach in Science and Practice (1999); and Developing a Digital
Technology of the Organization for the National Library for Undergraduate Science,
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology
Global Agenda Council on Nuclear, Chemical, Education (1998). He has been Director of the
and Biological Weapons of the World Economic Center’s Committee on Undergraduate Science
Forum. She is also a fellow of the International Education and oversees the National Academy
Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. She of Science’s efforts to improve the teaching of
holds a PhD in political science from the evolution in the public schools. Prior to
University of Minnesota and a master’s in assuming his position at the NRC Dr. Labov was
international public policy (international a member of the biology faculty for 18 years at
economics) from the Johns Hopkins University Colby College in Waterville, Maine.
School of Advanced International Studies.

Appendix F
Educational Institute for Responsible Research on

Infectious Diseases:
Ensuring Safe Science in the 21st Century
Aqaba, Jordan, September 7-13, 2012

Participants
ALGERIA
Mahmmoud Sayed Abd El-sadek, Lecturer,
Halima Benbouza, Head, National Physics Department, Faculty of Science, South
Biotechnology Research Center, Constantine Valley University, Qena
Abdelkader Bouyakoub, Professor, Department Marwa Ahmed Ali Abd EL Wahab, Lecturer,
of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences, University Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta
of Oran (Es-Sénia), Oran
Yahya Al-Naggar, Assistant Lecturer, Zoology
Ben Amar Cheba, Lecturer, Department of Department, Faculty of Science, University of
Biotechnology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Tanta, Tanta
Science and Technology-Oran-Mohamed
Boudiaf, Oran Manal Eid, Associate Professor, Department of
Botany, Faculty of Agriculture, Suez Canal
Noureddine Yassaa, Professor, Faculty of University, Ismailia
Chemistry, University of Sciences and
Technology, Houari Boumediene, Algiers Yahya Zakaria Eid, Associate Professor,
Department of Poultry Production, Faculty of
Agriculture, Kafrelsheikh University, Kafr El-
EGYPT Sheikh
Amal Abd EL Raof,Chief Researcher,Virology Mohamed Mostafa Ahmed Elhadidy, Lecturer,

Department, Animal Health Research Institute, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Mansoura
Cairo University, Mansoura
129

130 Appendix E
Mohamed Ahmed Ellabban, Lecturer, Faculty

of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia LIBYA
Mohamed El-Sayed El-Shinawi, Associate Abubaker Toboli, Head, Department of

Professor, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams Microbiology and Parasitology, Faculty of
University, Cairo Medicine, University of Benghazi, Benghazi
YEMEN
Mohammed Salah El-Tholoth, Lecturer,
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Mansoura Samira Al-Eryani , Assistant Professor,
University, Mansoura Department of Medical Parasitology, Faculty of
Medicine and Health Sciences, Sana’a
Mohammad Mustafa M. Ibrahim, Associate University, Sana’a
Professor, College of Biotechnology, Misr
University for Science and Technology, Giza Khaled Abdulla Al-Sakkaf, Assistant Professor,
Department of Community Medicine and Public
Fatma Salem, Botany Department, Faculty of Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health
Science, Suez Canal University, Ismailia Sciences, Aden University, Aden
Mohamed Labib Salem, Professor, Zoology Huda Omer Ba Saleem, Assistant Professor,
Department, Faculty of Science, Tanta Department of Community Medicine and Public
University, Tanta Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health
Sciences, Aden University, Aden
Yaldez Zein ElDin, Lecturer, Faculty of
Nursing, Damanhour University, Alexandria Amen Bawazir, Associate Professor, College of
Medicine, Khormaksar, University of Aden,
Aden
JORDAN
Ahmed Moharem, Assistant Professor,
Amjed Al-Fahoum, Electronic Engineering Department of Medical Laboratory, College of
Department, King Abdullah II School for Medicine and Health Sciences, Thamar
Engineering, Princess Sumaya University for University
Technology, Amman
Qais Abdullah Nogaim, Assistant Professor,
Saied Jaradat, Director, Princess Haya Department of Food Science and Technology,
Biotechnology Center, Jordan University of Faculty of Agriculture, Ibb University
Science and Technology, Irbid
Khalid M. Al-Batayneh, Associate Professor,

Department of Biological Sciences, Yarmouk
University, Irbid

APPENDIX G
Documents from the Institute
Call for Applications

Educational Institute on Responsible Research with Infectious Diseases:
Ensuring Safe Science in the 21st Century
8-13 September 2012, Aqaba, Jordan
Bibliotheca Alexandrina in cooperation with the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy
of Sciences announces the call for applications for the Educational Institute on Responsible Research with
Infectious Diseases: Ensuring Safe Science in the 21st Century.
The Institute will take place in Aqaba, Jordan from 8-13 September 2012. It aims to develop a network of
faculty in the Middle East–North Africa (MENA) region able to teach issues related to research with dual
use potential by using tenets of responsible science and active learning pedagogical techniques.
Eligibility Criteria
 Applicants must be faculty who have been working and living in Egypt, Yemen, Algeria or Abu
Dhabi and should apply in teams of 2-3 from each institution.
 Applicants must stay for the entire institute from 8-13 September 2012.
 Applicants must agree to use one or more of the instructional materials developed at the Institute in
their teaching, preferably in the fall semester 2012.
 It is expected that one member/team will participate in the follow-up evaluation meeting during the
academic year 2012-2013.
The following documents MUST be submitted:

1. Application form (click here)
2. Personal statement (no more than one page) that includes:
a. Your interest in scientific teaching
b. The types of courses you teach
c. What you hope to achieve by attending the Institute
Only complete applications will be considered

Deadline: July 23, 2012
131

132 Appendix G
Post-Institute Survey
As a participant in the recent Educational Institute on Responsible Research with Infectious Diseases:
Ensuring Safe Science in the 21st Century that was held in Aqaba, Jordan, from 7-13 September, 2012, 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 and to the Bibliotheca
Alexandrina 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 country and across the region. 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 minutes to complete.
Thank you for your participation.
Lida Anestidou and Jay Labov, on behalf of the organizing committee of the U.S. National Academy of
Sciences
Mohamed M. El-Faham, Director, Center for Special Studies & Programs, Bibliotheca Alexandrina
1. Which ONE of the following best describes your position in your institution?
Faculty or Lecturer for Undergraduate Students
Faculty or Lecturer for Graduate or Postdoctoral Students
Academic Administrator
Other (Please specify):
2. Please indicate which THREE reasons best describe why you chose to attend this Institute:
To meet colleagues from my country who share interests in responsible conduct of science
To meet colleagues from other countries 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 research in my country
To become more involved with future efforts to improve education about the responsible conduct
of research internationally
Other (please specify):
3. This Institute was designed to bring people together from across the Middle East/North Africa region
and hopefully to launch a series of future activities to promote education about the responsible conduct of

Appendix G 133
science. Based on discussions at the Institute and recommendations generated by participants, please
indicate which THREE of the following next steps you consider as the most important priorities for
maintaining momentum and moving forward to infuse education about the responsible conduct of
science into courses and other educational programs that are taught by you and your colleagues at your
institution?
___ Provide at least one similar workshop for current faculty colleagues at your institution
___ Provide at least one similar workshop for future faculty colleagues, i.e., graduate and post-graduate
students at your institution
___ Engage the leadership at your institution to enable you to create a permanent curricular modification
that allows you to provide such workshops on a regular basis
___ Create a network of faculty from your institution and from at least one more institution that will be in
charge of coordinating and teaching similar workshops
___ Lay the groundwork for proposals to seek support from various funding agencies for you and your
institution to support education about the responsible conduct of science.
___ Other: _______
4. How are you planning to move forward on the issues addressed at the Institute?
Am Already Plan to Do Not Plan Not Applicable

Using/Doing Use/Do to Use/Do
Obtain and share reports and other
resources on education and issues
related to the responsible conduct
of science from the National
Academies and the Bibliotheca
Alexandrina.65
Use reports and other resources
from the National Academies and
the Bibliotheca Alexandrina to
inform your own projects on the
responsible conduct of science.
Use reports and other resources
from the National Academies and
the Bibliotheca Alexandrina to
improve your pedagogy on the
responsible conduct of science and
other subject areas.

65
All reports from the National Academies are available for free download as pdf files at http://nap.edu.
Reports and other resources from the Bibliotheca Alexandrina are available at www.bibalex.org/cssp/publications/publications.htm
and
www.bibalex.org/Publications/BA_Publications_EN.aspx

134 Appendix G
Continue to discuss the messages

and outcomes of the Institute with
others in your projects or
organization
Discuss the Institute with
professional colleagues outside of
your organization.
Continue to interact with Institute
presenters and facilitators.
Continue to interact with other
Institute participants
Work with professional societies
and other organizations (to which I
belong to encourage colleagues to
employ active learning in teaching
about the responsible conduct of
science and related topics.
Other (please describe):
5. How well did the Institute meet your expectations?
Exceeded My Met All of My Met Some of My Did Not Meet

Expectations Expectations Expectations My Expectations
Please explain what you found particularly effective OR ineffective.
6. Please rate the Institute on:
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor

Value of the Institute as a
learning or professional
development experience
Clarity of Institute’s goals and

Appendix G 135
objectives
Relevance of topics that were
presented in relation to the
stated goals of the Institute
Quality of sessions about the
responsible conduct of science
Quality of sessions about the
scientific basis for the use of
active learning techniques
Relevance to you and your
work of the issues presented
Usefulness of resources
provided by the organizers and
presenters (e.g., background
resources in the Dropbox and
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
7. If the National Academies were to organize and host additional Institutes or related activities on this
topic in the future, would you be interested in participating?
Definitely yes Maybe No
If yes, what role would you see for yourself in such activities?

136 Appendix G
8. Please offer suggestions about what to incorporate or avoid in future National Academies activities
related to education about the responsible conduct of science.
Your name (optional)

Appendix G 137
Funding Available to Help Implement Teaching about the

Responsible Conduct of Science
Funding up to $1500 to help implement teaching about the responsible conduct of science (RCS) is
available to participants who attended the recent Institute in Aqaba, Jordan, organized by the U.S.
National Academy of Sciences and the Bibliotheca Alexandrina. Those wishing to be considered for an
award should submit an application of no more than 2 pages explaining how they propose to implement
the teaching of RCS.
Applications need to describe the following:
Applicant(s) - Applicant(s) or team responsible for conducting, managing and coordinating the project
Goal(s) - Describe the overall learning goals for what you wish to implement
Objectives - List the objectives of the RCS teaching event and briefly describe how you will assess if you
were successful in meeting those objectives
Approaches—indicate the teaching methods to be used
Participants—Describe the expected audience (i.e., colleagues, postdoctoral fellows or postgraduates) and
the reason it was chosen
Budget - This should detail anticipated costs and any funding/support which will be available from your
institution to offset costs. Explain what resources your institution is willing to provide (space, support,
etc.)
Timeline—Describe the expected timeframe in which you will conduct and assess the success of your
project
Anticipated Problems—Identify any anticipated difficulties and comment on how these difficulties
might/will be addressed
Sustainability - Explain how you will attempt to sustain teaching about RCS at your institution and,
where possible, promote it in your country of residence.
Funds will be allocated as a U.S. National Academy of Sciences award to individuals and will provide no
support for institutional costs. Although the principal applicant must have been a participant at the
Aqaba Institute, the application may name other individuals who will work with you on the project but
who did not attend the Institute. Joint applications from several participants at the Aqaba workshop who
propose to work together will be particularly welcome.
The deadline for receipt of applications is OCTOBER 18, 2012.
The proposals will be reviewed by the project’s committee members and individuals who will receive
awards will be notified on or about November 1, 2012.


Developing Capacities For Teaching Science in MENA Region

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Developing Capacities For Teaching Science in MENA Region

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region: Refashioning Scientific Dialogue

Developing Capacities for Teaching

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Committee on Developing a Framework for an International Faculty Development Project on

Board on Life Sciences

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-28639-8

Copyright 2013 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR AN INTERNATIONAL FACULTY

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

BOARD ON LIFE SCIENCES

JO HANDELSMAN (Chair), Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

FRANCES E. SHARPLES, Director

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND the substantial funding that enables research to

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

2 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

4 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

6 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

10 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Researchers have learned that they cannot

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

12 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

THE “CULTURE OF RESPONSIBILITY” IN cover research “with both recombinant and/or

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

14 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

16 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Biosafety and Biosecuritya

Two widely available definitions of these terms are:

obligated to “take any necessary measures” attention or initiatives on the part of

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

18 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Origins of the Project organizations; the Polish Academy of Sciences

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

20 Developing Capacities for Teaching Responsible Science in the MENA Region

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.