UNIVERSITY OF BALAMAND WORKSHOP ON “RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH CONDUCT” Implementation of the

1. UNIVERSITY OF BALAMAND WORKSHOP ON “RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH CONDUCT” Implementation of the 2nd MENA Education Institute & US National Academy of Sciences Feb 6, 2015

2. University of Balamand, Nov 7, 2014 Facilitators: • Abdel-Massih Roula, Ph.D. • Kassab Rima, Ph.D . • Yammine Paolo, Ph.D. Responsible Research Conduct http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2007/07/science-idol-2007-cartoon-contest-vote.html

6. This is part of a wider project initiated by  US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to raise awareness about responsible science. • UOB team was selected to participate in the 2nd MENA Educational Institute on Responsible Science (Trieste May 7-12, 2014)

7. The main topics of this workshop were decided on • After meeting with a group of our postgraduates and discussing the pre- or misconceptions they have on: • Authorship • Plagiarism • Scientific misconduct. • Points of tension with their mentors/supervisors were also discussed and some of these points will be covered in a future workshop.

8. Student Assistants • A team of 5-6 of postgraduates were introduced to active learning methods before the workshop. • These postgraduates were divided into different groups during the workshop so that they can ensure the active involvement of all members. • Some of these postgraduates are already involved with us in different activities such as School Health or Science Days • The postgraduates* helped in the preparation of a small song or movie on scientific misconduct. *Marie-Anne Boujaoude, Jina Farah, Jean-François Jabbour, Rita El-Khoury

9. AIM • To introduce participants to the concept of Responsible Science.

10. Target group: • Postgraduate students (M.Sc. & Ph.D.) • Senior undergraduate students • Junior faculty and staff • Methodology: - Lectures, group discussion, case-studies, role-play • Assessment: - Pre-test, evaluation during discussions, post-test .

11. Objectives • Define the main elements of Responsible Conduct of Research • Identify and recognize the different forms of Scientific Research Misconduct • Analyze and differentiate between Falsification, Fabrication, Plagiarism • Recognize how to give appropriate credit for intellectual contributions to scientific work (Authorship, Acknowledgement, and proper citation)

12. Outline • Introduction • Pre-test • Define Responsible Research Conduct • Identify Different Forms of Research misconduct • Differentiate between FFP • Recognize how to give appropriate credit for intellectual contribution • Post-test • Conclusions and evaluations

13. Approaches: • Introduction: Team- Aim- Objectives- Explanation of pre-test and post-test concept Time: 10min Facilitator: Roula Abdel-Massih • Pre-test: to assess the participants’ pre- or misconceptions on research misconduct and authorship issues. Time: 15 min Facilitator: Paolo Yammine

14. Objective 1: • Define Responsible Research Conduct • Activity 1: List local examples of science misconduct • Approach: Brainstorming[flip charts] • Time: 15 min Facilitator: RimaKassab

15. Objective 2: • Identify different forms of Research Misconduct and suggest solutions. • Activity 2: Case Study: Korean Stem Cell Case Stem cell scandal : HarukoObokata • Approach: Divide into groups-Discuss-Report back • Time: 60 min Facilitator: Roula Abdel-Massih • Activity 3: Ask groups to suggest solutions • Approach: Divide into groups-Discuss-Report back • Time: 10 min Facilitator: Roula Abdel-Massih

16. Objective 3: • Differentiate between FFP (falsification, fabrication, & plagiarism). • Activity 4: • Each group will work on one form of scientific misconduct; then groups will present their findings to each other. • The facilitator will emphasize the different forms of scientific misconduct and how to avoid them. • Approach: Interactive Lecture + Jigsaw + group feedback • Time: 30 min Facilitator: RimaKassab

17. Objective 4: • Recognize how to give appropriate credit for intellectual contribution: Plagiarism • Activity 5: • Original scientific texts and plagiarized passages or texts without proper citation will be given to groups of participants to work on. • References to read more about plagiarism and proper citation will be distributed. • Approach: Group work- Discuss-Report back • Time: 60 min Facilitator: Paolo Yammine

18. Objective 4 (cont): • Recognize how to give appropriate credit for intellectual contribution: Authorship Activity 6: Role-play to emphasize problems with authorship & acknowledgements • Approach: Role-Play/ Discussion • Time: 30min Facilitator: RAM, RK, PY

19. Objective 4 (cont): Activity 7: Order of authors - Different case studies were distributed to groups  to determine who the authors should be, order, and who should be acknowledged. - A mini-lecture and discussion on ICMJE recommendations (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors ) - Groups will be asked to review their results and present their case • Discussion of results. Approach: Jigsaw- Time: 60 min Facilitator: RAM, RK, PY

20. Assessments • Pre-test/Post-test • Facilitators will be evaluating the groups • Group presentations/ Role-play/ feedback • A survey for feedback after the workshop

21. Problems faced • More workshops needed for students to grasp all ideas discussed • Many questions remained unanswered especially when dealing with authorship • Some people attending were already familiar with concepts discussed thus had to stimulate them by using different active learning techniques

22. Pre-test/Post-test • Selected from : MENA II Education Institute on Responsible Science Trieste, Italy, May 8, 2014

23. 1. Identify 2 examples of actions that you consider to be irresponsible research practices • Falsification • Plagiarism • Fabrication • Authorship problems (wrong authors or order) • Copy results/cheat • Not using a control • Using information from unproven research • Using weak or unreliable sources • Project/research not taken seriously by advisor

27. 2. Describe one way in which research misconduct can be prevented or reduced: In the laboratory: • Provide better equipment • Awareness through information sessions • Results checked by the advisor frequently • Repeat the experiment to confirm results • Previous agreement (rules and punishment) • Mentors of more experience should agree on a paper’s publication • Proper use of equipment • Being objective and use accurate results • Not acknowledging technicians

31. 3. Describe one way in which research misconduct can be prevented or reduced: Across the university: • Helping out with the research in every mean possible • Workshops • Results monitored by mentor • Having more than one supervisor • Assign responsible persons to supervise the supervisors (such as board) • Establish rules (and respect them) • Availability of material for the student to be happy with what he’s doing • Hiring responsible researchers after several interviews • Punishment • Banning plagiarism • Provide (and use) sites that are credible • Writing reports (and updating them) • More Funding

35. 4-Describe one way in which research misconduct can be prevented or reduced: Across the country • Awareness by the ministry and government • Put regulations and rules • A reliable committee that investigates results obtained • Impose penalties (by paying or jail) • Money • Collaboration between universities • Results highly revised before publication • More funding 

39. 5-

40. 6-

43. 7-

46. 8-

49. 9-