Integrity in Scientific Research Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct (2002) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 Evaluation By Self-Assessment
6 Evaluation By Self-Assessment
Pages 112-123
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 112... ...
Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research (NAS, 1992~: · Individual scientists in cooperation with officials of research institutions should accept formal responsibility for ensuring the integrity of the research process. They should foster an environment, a reward system, and training processes that encourage responsible research practices.
|
From page 113... ...
Many different accrediting bodies exist, and these are based either on geography or, for professional schools, on the degree granted. In virtually every case, the heart of the accreditation process is self-assessment (Borden and Owens, 2001; Ewell and Lisensky, 1988; Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2000~.
|
From page 114... ...
Institutions that have recently completed an accreditation cycle often serve as models for other institutions as the latter prepare for a similar process, thereby encouraging a culture of quality improvement (Ewell and Lisensky, 1988~. The self-assessment process is organized around a set of faculty committees, each responsible for analysis and recommendations concerning an element or program of the institution considered important in determining institutional effectiveness (Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2000~.
|
From page 115... ...
Such education should be viewed in its broadest sense, however, occurring not only through formal instruction but also through the institutional atmosphere, policies, and guidelines, as well as through the quality of mentoring (King, 1999; Swazey et al., 1993~. A Role for Institutional Accrediting Bodies The committee believes that assessment of the effectiveness of institutional efforts to ensure integrity in the research environment can best be accomplished by incorporating evaluations of integrity in research into existing accreditation processes for institutions of higher education.
|
From page 116... ...
An important next step will be for universities and university associations, working together, to acknowledge the importance of conducting research and education in research in an environment of high integrity. Certainly the strong governmental and public interest in research integrity will prove ample encouragement to support initiating the peer review process, Universities and research sponsors should urge accrediting bodies, especially those charged with accrediting education programs with a substantial research mission, to include an evaluation of the environment for promotion of integrity in research in the overall processes of accreditation.
|
From page 117... ...
The need for independent self-assessment has already been recognized by a number of prominent institutions absent a mandate (Center for Academic Integrity, 2001~. Other mechanisms for peer review can be developed, but the committee concludes that explicit and public processes for external peer review help to ensure credibility and public confidence.
|
From page 118... ...
Similarly, only accredited schools of medicine are eligible to receive federal education grants and to participate in federal loan programs. Additionally, federal agencies sometimes review and approve the accrediting bodies themselves.
|
From page 119... ...
Since the nation's economy and national security, as well as the health of its people, are heavily dependent on continuing reliable research findings, the federal government and the public rightfully place a high priority on integrity in research. The federal government deserves support in its call for more effective strategies to encourage changes in the environment for the promotion of integrity in research and the evaluation of the outcomes of such changes.
|
From page 120... ...
If further encouragement of an environment for integrity in research is truly a priority for research sponsors, then the sponsors should work cooperatively with educational institutions to share in the funding of such programs, particularly if the intent is to develop best practices rather than simply require minimal compliance with applicable regulations and policies. A Role for Professional and Scientific Societies Professional and scientific societies have a key role in developing, promoting, and inculcating codes of research ethics within their memberships.
|
From page 121... ...
Department chairs commonly regard annual selfevaluation of faculty members, followed by a formal discussion with the chair, as an important aspect of faculty mentoring. The committee concurs, and it advocates the inclusion of questions in the self-assessment process that evaluate behaviors that promote integrity in research.
|
From page 122... ...
· Federal research sponsors should work with educational institutions to develop funding mechanisms to support programs devoted to promoting the responsible conduct of research. REFERENCES ABIM (American Board of Internal Medicine)
|
From page 123... ...
2001. A continuing medical education lecture and workshop, physician behavior and barriers to change.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.