Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
1
Introduction
Increasing complexity and competitiveness in research environ-
ments, the prevalence of interdisciplinary and international involve-
ment in research projects, and the close coupling of commerce and
academia have created an ethically challenging environment for young
scientists and engineers. For the past several decades, federal research
agencies have supported projects to meet the need for mentoring and
ethics training in graduate education in research, often called training
in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). Recently, these agencies
have supported projects to identify ethically problematic behaviors and
assess the efficacy of ethics education in addressing them.
Congress and the public continue to pay attention to these issues,
and the America COMPETES Act (HR 2272) of 2007 specifies that pro-
posals for National Science Foundation (NSF) grants include mentoring
for postdoctoral fellows and ethics training for graduate and under-
graduate students in science and engineering.1 The NSF guidelines also
include a requirement that proposals for funds to support postdoctoral
researchers include a description of mentoring activities. In light of the
history of support for educating students and researchers in ethical or
responsible behavior and the current political interest, this seems an
appropriate time to review what we have learned so far and to identify
directions for the future.
With support from the NSF, the National Academy of Engineering
(NAE) Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society (CEES) held the
workshop “Ethics Education and Scientific and Engineering Research:
1The America COMPETES Act is accessible on line at http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/
attachments/2272.pdf.
OCR for page 2
2 ETHICS EDUCATION AND SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH
What’s Been Learned? What Should Be Done?” at the Keck Center of
the National Academies in Washington, D.C., on August 25 and 26,
2008. The Division of Policy and Global Affairs (PGA) of the National
Research Council (NRC) and the National Academies Committee on Sci-
ence, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP), which has produced
the third edition of On Being A Scientist,2 provided advice and support
for the workshop. On Being a Scientist is a guide that is widely used by
academic institutions and faculty members to teach research ethics (e.g.,
issues related to publication and authorship, the use of human subjects
in research, conflicts of interest, and intellectual property rights).
Many participants suggested that the workshop summary be orga-
nized around the themes of the panel sessions and discussions rather
than chronologically, because these themes tended to come up repeat-
edly and participants in each session addressed a number of different
themes. Thus readers will find that this summary focuses on themes
rather than the chronology of presentations and discussion.
The summary follows, loosely, the thematic order of the workshop
agenda (see Appendix A). The first topic (Chapter 2), the social envi-
ronment of science and engineering and ethics education, explores the
context in which ethics mentoring and ethics education take place and
the issues that context raises for future directions in ethics education.
Chapter 3 focuses on the need for ethics education for graduate stu -
dents and postdoctoral fellows in science and engineering. Chapter 4,
on models for effective programs, provides pragmatic guidance for aca -
demic administrators and research investigators who want to develop
programs or activities in ethics education; this chapter includes infor-
mation on instructional and institutional approaches to mentoring and
ethics education. Chapter 5 is about assessment of approaches to ethics
education. Chapter 6 is a summary of the discussions about next steps.
An ad hoc workshop planning committee helped develop the agenda
and nominate participants. Members of the committee included physicist
John Ahearne, NAE member and chair of the CEES Advisory Group
and former director of the Ethics Program of Sigma XI, the honorary
scientific society. Other members were University of California, Irvine
biologist Francisco Ayala, a member of the National Academy of Sciences
and a member of the committee that worked on the third edition of On
2The third edition is available through the National Academies Press at http://www.nap.edu/
catalog.php?record_id=292.
OCR for page 3
INTRODUCTION
Being a Scientist; astronomer Kathleen Flint, director of the Bring RCR
Home Project of the National Postdoctoral Association; political sci -
entist Mark Frankel, director of the Scientific Freedom, Responsibility
and Law Program of the American Association for the Advancement of
Science (AAAS); and psychologist Felice Levine, executive director of
the American Educational Research Association.
Four of the five committee members attended the workshop and
met with Rachelle Hollander, the CEES director, after the first day
to review progress. Levine then developed a thematic outline to help
organize the discussion on the second day. Frankel and Levine also met
briefly with the CEES director right after the meeting to go over material
for this summary and plans for follow-up activities. Twenty-five people,
as well as a number of NSF observers, attended the meeting (for a list
of attendees and committee members, see Appendix B).
Four sessions, chaired by members of the planning committee, were
held on the first day of the workshop: Needs and Issues for Ethics Edu-
cation in Scientific and Engineering Research; Pedagogical Methods and
Materials; Outreach and Assessment; and Reiew. The first three sessions
opened with brief presentations and responses by workshop invitees.
These were followed by group discussions on the topic of that session
and related matters. The fourth session was a general discussion and
review of the previous sessions. During lunch, a scenario used for ethics
training was presented, followed by a discussion. Dinner included a talk
about On Being A Scientist.
The second day began with a general discussion of next steps,
chaired by the CEES director. The group was then divided into four
smaller groups, two of which focused on the larger environment that
affects scientific and engineering research and two of which focused on
programmatic and assessment issues. The final session included reports
on these discussions and a plenary discussion highlighting ideas for the
workshop summary, again chaired by the CEES director.
Links to background materials from the workshop can be found on
the CEES home page at www.nae.edu/ethicscenter. These materials were
provided by participants, who submitted citations and resources they
thought attendees and others would find useful.3 Most presenters and
some respondents also submitted brief statements or PowerPoint slides
that can also be found on the CEES home page.
3Persons and organizations with information about other resources should feel free to send their
suggestions to CEES so they can be added to the list of resources and citations.
OCR for page 4
