A Proposal for Thinking Strategically About Ethics Education

Abstract

Training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) is mandated for select trainees supported by federal funds. RCR Instructors typically address standards and accepted practices for the planning, conduct and reporting of academic research. While this focus may be relevant to future academic scientists, the majority of science graduate students pursue careers in non-academic employment sectors (e.g., government, non-profit, industry). The ethical and regulatory conventions, norms and expectations of the academic setting may not always transfer to other work environments. As such, educators should focus less on answering specific questions about standards and practices in academia, and instead design ethics education to actively engage students in a learning process that prepares them with the skills to identify and navigate ethical dimensions in a wide range of possible science professions. This paper introduces the principles of andragogy and provides recommendations for educators to consider when designing research ethics education for graduate students seeking cross-sector science careers. By applying principles that resonate with adult learning and integrating strategies that promote self-directed and life-long learning (e.g., reflective practice and collaborative projects), professional and research ethics instructional effectiveness may be enhanced. Introduction Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training is provided to students and postdoctoral trainees at academic institutions throughout the United States, primarily in response to federal funding requirements (NIH 1992; NIH 2009; NSF 2009). Core areas of instruction associated with RCR training (e.g., data management, conflict of interest, authorship, research subject protections) were initially identified by the National Institutes of Health (NIH 1992) and, later by the Public Health Service (PHS 2000). While subject matter areas were identified, the NIH did not present a prescriptive plan or establish standards for training; leaving the scope of RCR training open to the discretion of each institution. As a result, RCR educational initiatives have emerged over the past quarter century with diverse goals, content and instructional approaches (Kalichman & Plemmons 2007; DuBois et al. 2010; Mastroianni & Kahn 1999).