Assurance
NSF will require RCR training and oversight
The National Science Foundation published a notice pertaining to training in responsible conduct of research. The notice is available at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-19930.htm.
The notice states, “Effective January 4, 2010, NSF will require that, at the time of proposal submission to NSF, a proposing institution’s Authorized Organizational Representative certify that the institution has a plan to provide appropriate training and oversight in the responsible and ethical conduct of research to undergraduates, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers who will be supported by NSF to conduct research….training plans are not required to be included in proposals submitted to NSF, institutions are advised that they are subject to review upon request.”
It is expected that “NSF also will modify its standard award conditions to clearly stipulate that institutions are responsible for verifying that undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers supported by NSF to conduct research have received RCR training.”
ORI would like to hear your thoughts about the procedures described in NSF’s notice.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
August 26th, 2009 at 6:51 am
Will ORI have a similar policy?
August 26th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
It is a promising step. I hope in the future NSF will ensure the training actually takes place. Also that it is expanded to include faculty. Putting students through formal training but omitting the faculty who may be setting a very different example for the students is perhaps not quite so effective a training method.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
With RCR training being required of undergraduate students a number of issues arise with regard to requirements for refresher training. Will completion of RCR training at an early stage of education (say as a first year undergraduate) be considered sufficient for the life of a researcher? If not, what would trigger a need for new training: time from initial completion of an approved RCR course, transfer to the next stage of education, transfer to a new research institution, or something else?
September 16th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
By requiring an institutional plan, NSF centralizes the provision of “appropriate training and oversight in the responsible and ethical conduct of research.” This seems logistically attractive - NSF only has to argue with one person per institution, not one per lab; the amount of paperwork is reduced; and it may appear that the institution has a unified approach.
It also takes the burden off researchers, which they probably appreciate, but might not work out very well even from their own point of view. I’m imagining many scientists and engineers being delighted that the institution will take care of this, but then finding out later that the training contradicts some of their own practices, or is appropriate for one field but not others.
Universities are notoriously decentralized, and I am doubtful that this will actually be productive. It is certainly well-designed to provide apparent reform; but actual reform? I’m not so sure.
Ken Pimple, Indiana University (http://mypage.iu.edu/~pimple)
October 27th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
The NSF-mandated requirement for RCR training is a significant step forward in scientific research. As with the suspended HHS policy, institutions have broad latitude in how they meet this requirement. Although many would argue that the ideal model is one that integrates this instruction within the student’s research environment, we are not yet in a position to ensure such instruction will occur for each student. At the University of New Hampshire I have co-taught a semester-long course in RCR for the last four years. With my colleague, the University’s Manager of Research Integrity Services and an affiliate faculty member, we have had over 80 graduate students, staff, and faculty members in our course. The two most common comments from these individuals are these: “I didn’t know that.” and “This course should be required of all graduate students.” Although we advertise the course in various ways, most people enroll in the course on the recommendation of students who have taken the course. Once they become aware of the scope and the content of such instructional programs, students are eager to delve into the complex issues associated with RCR. There are, of course, other approaches but regardless of the format we need to find consistent and effective ways for providing instruction in RCR to our students and developing researchers. I applaud the NSF initiative and hope that HHS through ORI will revisit the 2000 proposal for RCR instruction.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Hmmm, this requirement isn’t mentioned anywhere in the latest NSF documentation for the January 7th full proposal date. Is this only for funding rounds whose preliminary stages begin on/after January 4th?