Database StockTaking Inventorying Heirri wp2 d2.3 PDF

1
Stock taking/
Inventorying (WP2)
D2.3 HEIRRI Database
1
PROJECT DETAILS Project acronym Project title

HEIRRI Higher Education Institutions and
Responsible Research and Innovation
Funding scheme Thematic priority

Horizon2020 Responsible Research and Innovation in
Higher Education Curricula
Starting date Project coordinator

01/09/2015 Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)
Duration of project
3 years
DELIVERABLE DETAILS Work package ID Expected date

WP2 31/08/2016
Work package title Deliverable ID and title

Stock taking / inventorying Deliverable 2.3: HEIRRI Database
Work package leader Deliverable description

Niels Mejlgaard The main objective is to develop a database
containing the evidence collected during
Task 2.1, the State of the Art review, and to
provide open access to its contents.
Nature Responsible for deliverable

[ X ] R – Report Niels Mejlgaard
[ ] O – Other
Submission date Dissemination level

31/08/2016 [ X ] P – Public
[ ] CO – Confidential, only for members of
the consortium
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
0. About HEIRRI .......................................................................................................................................... 5

1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 6
2. State of the Art Review ............................................................................................................................. 7
2.1 Review methodology........................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Main messages from review .............................................................................................................. 10
3. HEIRRI Database ................................................................................................................................... 11
3.1 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 12
4. Database descriptions ............................................................................................................................. 13
5. HEIRRI Database ................................................................................................................................... 17
5.1 Database entry: “FOSTER”............................................................................................................... 18
5.2 Database entry: “IRRESISTIBLE” ................................................................................................... 20
5.3 Database entry: “PACITA” ............................................................................................................... 23
5.4 Database entry: “ENRRICH” ............................................................................................................ 26
5.5 Database entry: “PARRISE” ............................................................................................................. 29
5.6 Database entry: “The Round Table: A bottom-up approach to ethics” ............................................. 31
5.7 Database entry: “The Neosocratic Dialogue: Discussing ethical questions of emerging technologies”
..................................................................................................................................................... 33
5.8 Database entry: “Teaching resources: Engineering, Technology and Society” ................................ 36
5.9 Database entry: “Community-University Research Alliances (CURA)” .......................................... 38
5.10 Database entry: “STIPS” ................................................................................................................... 40
5.11 Database entry: “Teaching engineering ethics across international and academic borders” ............. 42
5.12 Database entry: “TRREE” ................................................................................................................. 45
5.13 Database entry: “Public Engagement Training” ............................................................................... 47
5.14 Database entry: “Service Learning Programme ................................................................................ 49
5.15 Database entry: “Ethics in Life Sciences” ......................................................................................... 52
5.16 Database entry: “Theory of Science and Ethics” ............................................................................... 54
5.17 Database entry: “Contextualizing Nanotechnology Education: Fostering a Hybrid Imagination” ... 56
5.18 Database entry “Dilemma game `Professionalism and Integrity in Research´” ................................ 58
5.19 Database entry: “Camera drones in education" ................................................................................. 60
5.20 Database entry: “Erasmus Intensive Program in Sustainable Technology Development” ................ 62
3
5.21 Database entry: “Walking the City: Social Interactions in Learning through the Urban Environment”
..................................................................................................................................................... 65
5.22 Database entry: “Recommendation for Promoting Research Integrity” ............................................ 68
5.23 Database entry: “Harvesting Results Preparing for the Future (Mobile Educational DNA Labs)” ... 70
6. Appendix A: Template for case description............................................................................................ 72
4
Deliverable 2.3
HEIRRI Database
Niels Mejlgaard, Ivan Buljan, Núria Saladié, Marlene Altenhofer, Marta Cayetano, Nadja Gmelch, Erich
Griessler, Sigurd Gylstroff, Alexander Lang, Ana Marušić, Gema Revuelta, Roger Strand, Milena
Wuketich
with the HEIRRI consortium

5
0. About HEIRRI
RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) is a transformative emerging principle of research and
innovation policy. The RRI concept emerges from scholarly research that is critical of the status quo
and of the science-society interface. The aim of the HEIRRI project (Higher Education Institutions and
Responsible Research and Innovation) is to start to integrate RRI within the formal and informal
education of future scientists, engineers and other professionals involved in research and innovation
process.
HEIRRI takes as its starting point the six RRI key aspects identified by the European Commission: public
engagement, gender equality, open access, science education, ethics and governance in R&I. Most
crucially, HEIRRI wants to stress the potential of RRI as a transformative, critical and radical concept.
HEIRRI will create a stock-taking inventory including a State of the Art Review and a Database, to be
shared through open access. The inventory will gather results of other EU-funded RRI projects and
good practices in RRI and RRI learning. Also, various stakeholders involved in or affected by R&I will
participate in a debate and reflection process on RRI Learning through online and offline Forum
activities.
Results from the inventory will represent the basis for RRI training programs and formative materials,
offering the students knowledge and skills to develop viable solutions to specific problems related to
R&I, integrating theory and practice. They will be designed for the different HEI educational levels
(undergraduate, MD and PhD, summer courses and MOOC), mainly based on Problem Based Learning
methodology, and supported by multimedia materials (videos and microvideos, 2.0 materials, etc). All
results and products elaborated by HEIRRI will be uploaded on OA at RRI Tools Platform.
An internationalization plan will guarantee their spreading awareness and future use by HEI from
Europe and beyond. A global scope and expertise on RRI will be provided by HEIRRI consortium that
consist of 5 european HEI (Universitat Pompeu Fabra, UPF; Universitetet I Bergen, UiB; Aarhus
Universitet, AU; Institut Fuer Hoehere Studien und Wissenschaftliche Forschung, IHS; and Sveuciliste u
Splitu, UNIST), the European network of science centres and museums (AEESTI/Ecsite), “la Caixa”
Foundation (FBLC), a network of universities (Associació Catalana d’Universitats Públiques, ACUP) and
a private company specialized in R&I (Innovatec).
6
1. Introduction
The objective of the deliverable at hand ‘Deliverable 2.3: HEIRRI database’ is to summarize the main
results from the State of the Art Review (Task 2.1) and present the contents of the HEIRRI database,
which has been constructed on the background of the review. The main overall objectives of WP2 are
to 1) create an inventory of new and existing practices of RRI and RRI learning and 2) share it through
the ‘RRI Tools’ platform. The activities included in WP2 have been thoroughly outlined in ‘Deliverable
D2.1 – Inventory Guide of Work’1, and large blocks of text from D2.1 as well as ‘Deliverable D2.2 –
State of the Art Review2’ have been recycled in the present report in order to enhance transparency
and consistency.
The objective of Task 2.2 – ‘HEIRRI database’ is to develop a database containing the evidence
obtained in the state of the art review and provide open access to its content. The development of the
database has involved sorting and organizing the compilation of materials related to RRI teaching
produced by the state of the art review, selection of 23 exemplary cases for the HEIRRI database, and
development of case descriptions by partners in the HEIRRI project. The HEIRRI database will be
integrated with the existing RRI Tools platform to facilitate open access.
This report will start out by presenting a synthesis of the main results from Task 2.1, the review of RRI
learning, as a background to the selection of cases for the HEIRRI database. The bulk of the report,
however, is concerned with the HEIRRI database. The report outlines the objectives of Task 2.2 and the
methodology behind the construction of the database. Following that, a condensed overview of the
cases compiled for the HEIRRI database is presented, and finally, the individual cases (entries to the
database) are presented. The report includes the following chapters:
 A presentation of the results from Task 2.1 - State of the art Review of RRI teaching and learning in
higher education institutions (chapter 2)
 A description of the purpose of the database and the methodological approach (Chapter 3)
 A comprised presentation of the HEIRRI database (Chapter 4)
 A complete presentation of the entries in the HEIRRI database (Chapter 5)
The template that was used for the individual case descriptions is appended (Appendix A).
1 https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/heirri_wp2_d2.1
2 https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/heirri_wp2_d2.2
7
2. State of the Art Review

The main objective of Task 2.1 was to carry out a state of the art review of RRI and RRI learning in
higher education institutions. The review was designed to correspond with the overall objectives of the
HEIRRI project – understanding the processes and practices by which issues of responsibility in
research and innovation are brought into teaching and learning contexts in higher education
institutions. Because RRI is not easily and unidimensionally conceptualised3, the review focused not
only on literature and evidence specifically addressing ‘RRI’, but also broader literatures related to
issues of responsibility more broadly. The review was designed to explore the different ways in which
issues of responsibility in R&I can be taught and trained in higher educational institutions.
In relation to this aspect, it is important to note that while the HEIRRI project is guided by the notion of
the ‘six keys’ of RRI, the review was sensitive towards elements of RRI in teaching even though they did
not fit this scheme. Previous EC-funded projects such as the ‘Responsible Research and Innovation in a
Distributed Anticipatory Governance Frame - A Constructive Socio-normative Approach’ (Res-AGorA)
found that RRI is unevenly applied across European countries and that the facto rri may not universally
fit the ‘six keys’. In addition to this, the review was designed to support the subsequent work packages
– the training programme design in WP3 and the development of training materials in WP4. Therefore
the review aimed to capture a great variety of materials relevant to this purpose. The review
encompassed academic literature and grey literature such as policy documents, project reports,
training programmes and training materials, course descriptions, curricula, exemplary case descriptions
etc. The review thus included a variety of different documents in order to arrive at useful
understanding of ways of teaching issues of responsibility in higher education institutions.
2.1 Review methodology
The State of the Art review of RRI teaching involved a number of components, which were tailored to
capture information regarding RRI in a teaching and learning context as specified in the previous
section. The review consisted of six different components, as illustrated in Figure 1 below.
3See HEIRRI deliverable D2.2 “State of the art review” for a further elaboration on this issue.
https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/heirri_wp2_d2.2
8
Figure 1: Components of the review methodology
Components of the
Review Consultation of broader
communities, e.g.:
* RRI.net
1st HEIRRI Conference * SiS.net
* Dedicated * PCST-list
workshop related to
review * PSCI-COM
Scan of ‘RRI’ EU
projects:
Review of RRI Scan of ‘RRI’ documents:
* 55 projects in teaching
and learning * 257 policy documents
* 77 academic papers
Interviews with Consultation of HEIRRI

experts / key advisory boards
educators: * Participants in the 3
* 17 interviews advisory bodies
First, the review scanned selected ‘RRI literature’ that encompassed the body of academic papers and
policy documents that directly addressed the notion of RRI and also a broader body of literature that
focused on ideas and understandings of responsibility in research. To ensure that the review was in
alignment with the overall structure of the HEIRRI project, the selected documents were sampled to
cover at least the six dimensions of RRI, i.e. public engagement, science literacy and science education,
gender equality, open access, ethics, and governance of research and innovation. A total of 334
documents were identified and reviewed.
Second, the review scanned selected EU-funded RRI-projects such as GREAT, Res-AGorA, and MoRRI.
These projects were scanned for their relevance to the HEIRRI objectives and the review focused on
perspectives particularly relevant in relation to the teaching and learning context of HEIRRI. These
projects were identified by consulting the MoRRI project that recently identified relevant RRI projects.
A total of 55 European projects were reviewed for this component.
Third, the review consisted of a set of consultative procedures aimed a harvesting ‘RRI teaching’
resources. This was achieved by conducting interviews with external experts such as key educators and
9
scholars in educational research that possessed extensive experience in introducing responsibility into
teachings at higher education institutions. These experts were identified via an internal procedure,
where members of the consortium nominated informants. The rationale for carrying out the expert
interviews was to capture essential empirical documentation such as examples of course materials
relating to responsibility in research to be utilized for the HEIRRI training programme design in WP3. In
addition, the experts possessed unique information regarding both opportunities and barriers in
relation to implementing RRI teaching in higher education institutions.
Furthermore, the members of the HEIRRI advisory boards and forums were consulted in order to
identify additional resources for the review in the form of exemplary practices, programmes etc. Also,
broader communities of scholars and practitioners were also consulted by means of email inquiries
posted at relevant list-servers.
Finally, another important component of the review was the 1st HEIRRI conference celebrated in
Barcelona on March 18th, 2016. At this conference a special workshop was arranged that aimed at
summarizing the main messages from the conference and also identifying and collecting examples of
courses and materials related to RRI.
By utilizing the above mentioned sources for the review it was possible to carry out an extensive and
thorough review of RRI and RRI teaching. In the following, we will summarize the main messages
emerging from the review.
10
2.2 Main messages from review
Based on the review, some core elements of RRI teaching can be highlighted as desirable learning
outcomes. Emphasis should be on developing the student’s critical skills in relation to science. RRI
teaching must enhance the student’s ability for continuously critically questioning what constitutes
good and responsible research and innovation within their scientific domain. By fostering critical
thinking, students will be able to keep science responsible and also ensure that research is not ignorant
towards societal values and preferences. Teaching should invoke questions such as: ‘what constitutes
good and useful knowledge within my field of specialisation?’, ‘what are the effects of the research and
innovation activities within my field on broader society?’, and ‘what mechanisms can be used to align
knowledge production within my field with societal needs and expectations?’.
Moreover, RRI teaching should foster reflection about the interrelatedness of the students’ own
academic domain and other areas of science. RRI teaching should enhance the students understanding
of how their scientific domain and the skills they acquire in their education is related to other scientific
domains. For instance when a young researcher is conducting research within the domain of
bioengineering she should develop an understanding of the intersections of her own field and other
scientific domains and should be able to recognize her own place in the broader knowledge- and
societal ecosystems. RRI teaching should help students realize that the epistemological and social
problems of research and innovation are not independent but interrelated.
Critical, reflexive capacity is crucial for understanding the role and responsibilities of ones’ own field of
research. Acquiring ‘interdisciplinary’ skills, the ability to collaborate and coproduce knowledge with
researchers and professions outside your own field, is therefore also important. RRI teaching should
address this capacity for interdisciplinary collaboration, and the notion of hybridization emerged as a
relevant concept in the review. Hybridization captures the process of combining insights from across
disciplines as well as combining sound knowledge of norms and good practices in science with sound
analyses of the cultural, economic, environmental, and political context in which knowledge is
produced and used.
The review emphasized the relevance of problem-based or inquiry-based learning methodologies in

relation to teaching issues of responsibility in research and innovation. RRI teaching should provide
opportunities for participatory reflection, using real-life issues and cases that students can relate to as
a basis for the learning process. Such elements of teaching should contribute to fostering a greater
awareness of the interaction between the students’ field of study, other areas of research and
innovation, and broader society.
Other documents from the emerging RRI literature points towards teaching approaches which facilitate
a collaborate relationship between the teacher and the student. In this regard, the students should be
11
considered as “co-inquirers”, where traditional academic hierarchies are suspended in order to achieve
diverse perspectives on any given subject4. The teacher should function as a facilitator treating the
students as co-inquirers in order to foster a higher degree of voluntary participation from the students.
The argument is that by being treated as responsible individuals, who are capable also of taking
responsibility for their own learning processes, students are more likely to develop broader contextual
responsibilities. By adopting a collaborative and hierarchy-free teaching methodology a participatory
space is created for the students allowing them to participate in discussions and dialogues with focus
on collective deliberation and reflection.
Finally, the review also identified several barriers in relation to RRI teaching within higher education
institutions. It was highlighted that the discussion regarding responsible research and innovation
already exist within several universities but that the emerging RRI agenda nevertheless is faced with
several barriers. Resistance or lack of support at the level of management of HEIs and lack of incentives
for the individual researcher to engage with RRI teaching are the most important obstacles identified in
the review.
3. HEIRRI Database
The objective of Task 2.2 is to develop a database containing selected parts of the evidence collected
during Task 2.1, the State of the Art review, and to provide open access to its contents. In the
following, the approach to selecting cases for the database will be outlined.
A few contextual remarks are required. The review consisted of an array of different documents
ranging from traditional academic papers to training materials, courses, EU-projects etc. The cases
selected for the database were the ones considered to best illustrate the conclusions of the review and
which were considered particularly relevant as inspiration for WP3 and WP4. As a consequence of the
multiple sources and heterogeneous character of the review material, the selected cases are therefore
not uniform and the database has been constructed to support the heterogeneity of the cases. Hence,
when designing the template (Appendix A) for the database entries a special emphasis was placed on
ensuring the template would be able to accommodate the heterogeneity of the cases.
As part of the objective of HEIRRI, the database should be open access. This will be achieved by
integrating the database into the already existing ‘RRI Tools’ web platform. Within the framework of
RRI Tools, contents is classified as either ‘library elements’ (e.g. articles, reports, journals), ‘projects’
(relevant to RRI), ‘inspiring practices’ (external resources, cases, programmes, organizations), or ‘tools’
(e.g. methods, guidelines, training, monitoring). Each entry in the HEIRRI database is classified
4Sunderland; M. E.; Taebi, B.; Carson, C.; Kastenberg, W. (2014): Teaching global perspectives: engineering ethics
across international and academic borders. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1/2, 228-239.
12
according to this scheme, but a number of complementary classificatory attributes have been used as
well.
3.1 Methodology
The first step towards the development of the database has been to sort and organize the compilation
of materials collected during the review. The review process compiled a great amount of different
materials all related to RRI teaching in higher education institutions. The sorting task included a
categorization of the various cases into library elements, projects etc. according to the structure of the
‘RRI Tools’ website and an elimination of doublets between the HEIRRI compilation and the contents
already available at the RRI Tools platform. The different cases were also classified in relation to the six
‘RRI keys’.
Of the sorted material from the review a preliminary selection of potential cases for inclusion in the
database was compiled by the WP lead. These cases were selected based on a) their ability to illustrate
the conclusions of the review and b) their relevance as inspiration for WP3, the elaboration of the
training programme design and WP4, the development of training materials.
Subsequently, the preliminary selection was discussed by the HEIRRI consortium, and 26 entries were
chosen for in-depth presentation in the database. After having selected the cases for the HEIRRI
database a template for filling and fitting the empirical materials was developed (Appendix A). The
template provides space for describing – for each individual entry – the actual contents of the case
(what is it about), the way that it relates to RRI teaching and learning, its features in terms of
pedagogical methods, the academic domain and degree levels it is relevant for, its relation to the key
areas of RRI, and its alignment with the RRI Tools classification.
As a final step the cases were distributed among partners of the HEIRRI project, who completed the
case descriptions for each case. The collection of case descriptions can be considered to be the HEIRRI
database.
During the process of elaborating the selected entries for the database, concerns were raised regarding
three cases (EU projects) originally included in the pool of 26 cases. During the exploration of these
cases, they were considered only marginally useful in terms of providing concrete information
regarding RRI teaching. It was decided to exclude the three cases from the HEIRRI database since they
would not offer a significant contribution. The final list of entries in the HEIRRI database therefore
consists of 23 cases, which will be presented in the following chapter.
13
4. Database descriptions
The table below encompasses an overview of the final 23 entries of the HEIRRI database. The entries
have been condensed in the table below to allow for an overview of the cases. The complete
description of the entries can be found in the following chapter.
The database has been structured according to the different types of entries in order to present a clear
overview. The first 5 entries in the database are EU-projects relating to RRI, followed by 4 entries
relating to different teaching/pedagogical approaches in higher education institutions. The next 12
entries are programmes and courses taught at various universities concerning RRI in higher education
institutions. The final 2 entries consist of a policy document and a report.
Table 1: Overview of the 23 cases compiled in the HEIRRI Database

Name of course/ Short description Link
activity / document
FOSTER; EU-project FOSTER (Facilitate Open Science Training for European Research) is a 2-year, EU- Training portal:
Funded project. Its primary aim is to produce a European-wide training https://www.fosteropenscienc
programme that help young researchers, established scholars, postgraduate e.eu/
students, librarians, and other stakeholders to incorporate Open Access
approaches into their existing research methodologies. FOSTER aims to enable http://www.rri-tools.eu/-
its stakeholders to contribute to the growing amount of freely-accessible /foster_project
research papers.
IRRESISTIBLE; EU- The aim of IRRESISTIBLE (Including Responsible Research and innovation in http://www.irresistible-
project cutting Edge Science and Inquiry-based Science education to improve Teacher's project.eu/images/irr-
Ability of Bridging Learning Environments) is to design activities that make mat/IRRESISTIBLE_folder_EN_0
young people more aware about RRI issues and foster their involvement in RRI 2-2014.pdf
processes. Awareness for RRI should be raised through formal (school) and
informal (science centre, museum, or festival) educational approaches.
PACITA; EU-project PACITA (Parliaments and civil society in Technology Assessment) aims at http://www.pacitaproject.eu/
“increasing the capacity and enhancing the institutional foundation for
knowledge-based policy-making on issues involving science, technology and
innovation, mainly based upon the diversity of practices in Parliamentary http://www.technology-
Technology Assessment (PTA)”. Science, civil society organizations, assessment.info/index.php/wel
stakeholders, citizens, parliaments and/or governments are engaged directly come)
into activities of the project in order to gather knowledge, create common
results and foster the exchange between different actors.
ENRRICH; EU- ‘Enhancing Responsible Research and Innovation through Curricula in Higher http://www.livingknowledge.or
project Education’ (ENRRICH) aims to improve the capacity of students and staff at HEIs g/projects/enrrich/
to embed RRI into curricula, especially considering the research needs of
society, represented by civil society organisations (CSOs). In the course of the
project, good practices and relevant resources will be identified, developed,
piloted, and disseminated. Furthermore, ENRRICH wants to enhance the
14
exchange and debate about implementing RRI in curricula across Europe.
PARRISE; EU-project PARRISE (Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research and Innovation in http://www.parrise.eu/
Science Education) is a European project which centres around the theme of
‘socio-scientific inquiry based learning’. The purpose of the project is to provide
an overall educational format for both teachers and citizens, and to establish a
network/community of stakeholders with different professional profiles that
would enable transaction of knowledge and rising of awareness about socio-
scientific inquiry based learning application.
The Round Table: A The Round Table is a bottom-up participatory approach for addressing ethical Felt, U., Fochler, M.; Müller, A.,
bottom-up issues of research and innovation, designed by the Swiss Science et Cité Strassnig, M. (2009): Unruly
approach to ethics foundation.. Felt et al. (2009) adapted this design and implemented a Round ethics: on the difficulties of a
Table on genome research, bringing together laypeople and scientists. They bottom-up approach to ethics
then analysed the actors’ engagement and the unfolding discussions in this in the field of genomics. Public
particular setting. Understanding of Science 18
(3), 354-371.
The Neosocratic The Neosocratic Dialogue (NSD) is an extension to participatory technology Birnbacher, D. (1999). The
Dialogue: discussing assessment (PTA) for addressing ethical questions of emerging technologies. Socratic method in teaching
ethical questions of NSD is considered a consensus-oriented tool that allows stronger participation medical ethics: Potentials and
emerging of citizens in debates on ethical questions around technologies. limitations. Medicine, Health
technologies Care and Philosophy, 99(2),
219–224.
Teaching resources: ‘Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology and Society’ is a publication by http://www.morganclaypool.co
‘Engineers, Professor Caroline Baillie (University of Western Australia) that gathers a series m/toc/ets/1/1
Technology and of lectures to foster interdisciplinarity among engineers and scientists. The aim
Society’; University is to promote an understanding of the inclusive nature of both professions by http://www.morganclaypool.co
of Western drawing on multiple fields. m/toc/ets/1/1#lecturesAvailabl
Australia eOnline
Community- The Community-University Research Alliances (CURA) programme was created http://www.sshrc-
University Research in January 1999. Nearly 100 CURAs have been launched since 1999, creating crsh.gc.ca/funding-
Alliances (CURA); alliances between community organizations and HEIs and fostering mutual financement/programs-
funding programme learning, training and innovative research based on equal partnership between programmes/cura-aruc-
the organizations from the community and the HEI. eng.aspx
STIPS; Osaka ‘STiPS: Program for Education and research on Science and Technology in Public http://www.stips.kyoto-
University and Sphere’, is a postgraduate minor (sub-major programme) that fosters integrated u.ac.jp/stips_e
Kyoto University design capacity within the field of Nanoscience.
http://stips.jp/english/
Teaching The University of Berkeley implemented a pilot programme on embedding Sunderland; M. E.; Taebi, B.;
engineering ethics ethics in the centre of engineering curricula. The programme was designed as Carson, C.; Kastenberg, W.
across international an intensive, five-day summer course and brought together graduate students (2014): Teaching global
and academic from different disciplines and countries. perspectives: engineering
borders; article ethics across international and
academic borders. Journal of
Responsible Innovation 1/2,
228-239.
TRREE Training and Resources in Research Ethics Evaluation (TREE) is a consortium http://elearning.trree.org/
made of stakeholders from Northern and Southern countries. It aims to provide
basic training, and build capacity, regarding ethics of health research involving
humans by promoting highest ethical standards and the welfare of participants.
15
TRREE proposes to achieve this goal primarily by developing a training

programme with local collaborators. The courses are designed for self-learning,
and deal with ethics in general and/or specific ethical problems.
Public Engagement ‘Public Engagement Training’ is a project developed at UCL. The aim of the http://www.ucl.ac.uk/public-
Training; University project is to raise awareness of public engagement in higher education engagement
College London institutions and to promote public engagement in scientific research. One of the
activities in relation to public engagement training is connecting students`
projects with the lay public to foster interaction and cooperation among them.
Service Learning Service Learning is an educational approach that combines learning processes http://www.urv.cat/aprenentat
Programme; and community service in a single project, in which the participants learn while geservei/en_index.html
Universitat Rovira i working on real needs of their environment, so they can take steps to improve
Virgili it. It is a complex activity that links community service to the learning of https://issuu.com/heirriproject
content, competencies, skills and values through reflexive practice. The aim of /docs/service_learning_progra
the Service Learning approach is to provide reflexive practice since it establishes mme_at_unive
connections between students’ service experiences and the academic
curriculum.
Ethics in Life This four-week course for masters’ students provides students with a toolbox of http://www.vu.nl/nl/studiegids
Sciences; Vrije ethical instruments for research projects on ethics. Throughout the session, /2015-2016/master/a-
Universiteit students enhance their critical and ethical reflexion and become equipped to b/biomedical-
Amsterdam handle ethical dilemmas for their future careers. This is a compulsory course in sciences/index.aspx?view=mod
all Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences (FALW) Master programmes, except for ule&origin=50051475&id=5004
Health Sciences and Neurosciences. 3929
Theory of Science The course addresses the relationship between science and society while http://www.uib.no/en/svt/218
and Ethics; encouraging students to critically reflect upon their own research. It offers 73/course-description-vithf900-
University of intensive supervision of paper discussions, and students develop a capacity for theory-science-and-ethics
Bergen critical reflection about ethical issues.
Contextualizing This course fosters a so-called ‘hybrid imagination’, as an approach to improve http://vbn.aau.dk/en/publicati
Nanotechnology the ability of students to think across disciplines and to examine the societal ons/contextualizing-
Education: context for and implications of their scientific subject. It is offered to students in nanotechnology-
Fostering a Hybrid engineering education programmes during their first year. education(d029e310-ddc7-
Imagination; 11de-88f9-
Aalborg University 000ea68e967b).html
Dilemma game The Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) developed the Dilemma Game, which http://www.eur.nl/english/eur/
‘Professionalism helps staff and students discuss dilemmas and stimulates them to find solutions. publications/integrity/dilemma
and integrity in This game contains many common integrity issues and it also offers participants _game/
research’; Erasmus the opportunity to formulate dilemmas from their own practice. It uses many
University dilemmas in science and invites discussion on the subject. The game lets http://ed.ted.com/on/uk36wto
Rotterdam participants consider, choose and defend (and possibly reconsider) alternative i
courses of action regarding a realistic dilemma concerning professionalism and
integrity in research.
Camera drones in As part of the Bachelor programme in New Media at the Department of http://www.uib.no/en/news/9
education; Information Science and Media Studies at University of Bergen, the first 9154/media-students-become-
University of innovative drone course for media students is offered. In the course, the drone-experts
Bergen students are taught how to responsibly utilize visual technology such as drone
usage as a journalistic tool. https://issuu.com/heirriproject
/docs/smart_drones_for_journ
alism._teachi
Erasmus Intensive The course is organized around sustainability topics that are analysed through https://is.upc.edu/?set_langua
Program in case studies situated in different contexts ranging from local to global issues. ge=en
Sustainable The main aims of the project are to increase the understanding of a sustainable
Technology development, increase the capability to apply foresighting, forecasting and http://www-
16
Development; backcasting and to contribute to the development of scientific work csd.eng.cam.ac.uk/proceedings

Universitat competences of the students. -of-the-eesd13-conference-
Politècnica de cambridge-2013-v-2/eesd13-
Catalunya published-papers/segalas-j.pdf
Walking the city: ‘Walking the city’ is a teaching practice organised by way of visits and city tours https://issuu.com/heirriproject
social interactions with the purpose of developing new was to understand the city and urban /docs/walking_the_city__social
in learning through spaces. The aim of the programme is to promote active reflection and the _interactio
the urban profound assimilation of urban experiences in the field of teaching urbanism
environment; and deepening the students’ knowledge of the city. The programme
Universitat encompasses different disciplines such as architecture, sociology, and history.
Politècnica de
Catalunya
Recommendation This policy document provided by the Irish Council for Bioethics in Ireland http://health.gov.ie/wp-
for Promoting represents a summary of important decisions and suggestions about research content/uploads/2014/07/Reco
Research Integrity; integrity, supported by real world examples. The document describes several mmendations_for_Promoting1.
policy document areas of research integrity, beginning with the description of research integrity pdf
concept, and then proceeding to list the core values emphasised by research
integrity. Two approaches for greater integrity are described: promotional
(educational) and deterrent, and these approaches can be applied differently in
specific research fields.
Harvesting Results This report by the Centre for Society and Life Sciences in the Netherlands starts http://www.society-
Preparing for the with a brief description of genomic science development from its origins until lifesciences.nl/
Future (Mobile today. The description is focused on ELSI (Ethical, Legal and Social Implications)
Educational DNA and ELSA (Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects) programmes which are funded by
Labs); report numerous international agencies. One of the results of the ELSA/ELSI
programmes (applied mostly in elementary schools in Netherlands) were mobile
DNA labs, designed especially for educational purposes, where scientists
communicate with students about the field of genomic science.
17
5. HEIRRI Database
Where the former chapter presented a comprised overview of the entries for the HEIRRI database this
chapter presents the full entries. These case descriptions will be integrated into the online web
platform of RRI Tools.
18
5.1 Database entry: “FOSTER”
FOSTER
Brief description
FOSTER (Facilitate Open Science Training for European Research) is a 2-year FP7 project of 13 partners
across 8 countries whose primary aim is to “produce a European-wide training programme that help
young researchers, established scholars, postgraduate students, librarians, library managers and other
stakeholders to incorporate Open Access approaches into their existing research methodologies”, in
the context of the European Research Area (ERA) and in complying with the open access policies and
rules of participation set out for Horizon 2020.
FOSTER enables its stakeholders to contribute to the growing holdings of freely-accessible research
papers in Europe, to share and preserve their data productively, and prepares them to engage with
and develop new knowledge communities in the digital age. FOSTER consolidates training activities at
downstream level and reaching diverse disciplinary communities and countries in the ERA. Each type of
stakeholder will be provided with a range of relevant training programmes, practical advice, support
and help in engaging, dynamic and outcome-oriented way.
RRI teaching and learning relevance

The FOSTER project has developed the “FOSTER portal”, which is an e-learning platform that brings
together training resources on Open Science and on how to develop strategies and skills for
implementing Open Science practices in daily workflows. To this end, several training toolkits have
been developed and made openly available for re-use.
The topics of the training resources are, among many others, on Open Access, Open Data, Open
Reproducible Research, Open Science Definition, Open Science Evaluation, Open Science Guidelines,
Open Science Policies, Open Science Projects, Open Science Tools.
In the portal, four categories of resources are identified: Resources, Events, Questions, and Courses. It
is possible to enrol in a course, or create one. Existing courses are addressed to the identified targets of
the project. Examples are: “Key Skills for Open Science and Responsible Research and Innovation”,
“Open Science at the Core of Libraries”, or “Integrating Open Science in Information Literacy
education”, and they are available in Portuguese, English, Spanish, Polish...
Teaching format / pedagogical characteristics

All courses are available online and for free. They all have a short introduction to the course, followed
by the identified learning objectives of each case. All courses at the FOSTER portal are addressed to
19
specific audiences, though many converge: Librarians and Repository managers, Researchers and
Students, Project Managers, Policy makers and Funders, PhD students, Research Administration,
and/or Publishers. Every course includes information of its internal learning modules, and has its own
“Course Forum”, where people learning can comment on the content. The teaching approach is
basically e-learning and self-learning, dissemination of training materials/contents, tutorials... Some
courses include a quiz to evaluate the knowledge acquired.
As described by the project, training programmes include: e-learning, b-learning (blended-learning),

self-learning, dissemination of training materials/contents, helpdesk, face-to-face training, training-
the-trainers, summer schools, seminars, etc. All in all, the database provides educational practices that
enable the engagement between scientists and society.
Keywords
Open, science, access, data, repositories.
Relevant degree levels

Bachelor level Master level PhD level Other, please specify
X X X Many identified audiences: Project
Managers, Researchers and
Students, Policy makers and
Funders, Librarians and Repository
managers, PhD students, Research
Administration, Publishers, etc
Relation to ‘RRI Keys’

Citizen and Science Gender Open access Ethics in R&I R&I Inclusion / Sustainability
CSO literacy and equality governance social justice
engagement education
X X X
Relation to ‘RRI Tools’ classification

Inspiring practice Project Tool Library element
X
Target audience / participants

Natural science and engineering Biomedicine and health Humanities and social science Technology development and
innovation
X X X X
Sources, links, further readings
Training portal: https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/

https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/project/
http://www.rri-tools.eu/-/foster_project
http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/111215_en.html
20
5.2 Database entry: “IRRESISTIBLE”
IRRESISTIBLE
Brief description
The IRRESTISTIBLE (Including Responsible Research and innovation in cutting Edge Science and Inquiry-
based Science education to improve Teacher’s Ability of Bridging Learning Environments) project has
been ongoing from 2013- 2016 and is funded under the European Commission FP7 framework. The
project’s aim is to design activities that make young people more aware about RRI issues and foster
their involvement in RRI processes. Awareness for RRI should be raised through formal (school) and
informal (science centre, museum, or festival) educational approaches.
In the project, “Communities of Learners” (CoL), consisting of researchers, teachers, educational
specialists, and specialists in informal learning from science centres, are formed. These CoL develop
thematic educational modules on controversial real-life research cases, which are based on Inquiry
Based Science Education; these modules will then be used in schools. Additionally, students should visit
research laboratories and develop exhibits about studied RRI issues, which should then be presented in
science centres involved in the project. The best exhibits will further be presented at an international
conference.
All of the training modules will be available online in different languages on the project’s website
(www.irresistible-project.eu).

While the project focuses on education in school, some of their results might also be used for teaching
and learning in HEIs. The developed thematic educational modules are based on Inquiry Based Science
Education, which could potentially also be applied in teaching RRI in HEIs. The project focuses on
teacher training: school teachers should be prepared and trained to work with their students on the
respective educational modules on RRI. This “train the trainer” approach might be useful for RRI
teaching and learning in HEIs, as it could serve as an input for the preparation of teachers and lecturers
teaching RRI in HEIs.
The modules of the project further address research topics at the involved universities, which allow
students to work on real-life cases and make RRI issues more tangible to them. Moreover, the chosen
research cases are controversial, partly uncertain, and under debate, which encourages critical thinking
and reflexivity. Additionally, the modules support addressing RRI issues, such as societal and
environmental implications, or ethical issues.
21

The project’s educational approach is characterised by some major steps. First, different stakeholders
form “Communities of Learners” (CoL), which develop different educational modules. These modules
as well as their development are based on Inquiry Based Science Education. Second, school teachers
are trained in order to train other teachers as well as to work with their students on the respective
cases and RRI issues (“train the trainer”). Third, the different modules are tested and used in school
classes. Fourth, students experience research-based education as the modules also include e.g. visits at
research laboratories. Additionally, critical thinking and reflexivity might be encouraged as the topics of
the modules address controversial and new research cases. Fifth, there is a strong active part of the
modules: Students develop exhibits about the studied RRI issues/cases, which are then presented in
science centres.
The project apparently works with concrete real-life cases from areas like healthy ageing, genomics,
climate change, renewable energy and sustainability, nanoscience, etc. Moreover, the modules are
supposed to be research-based and include site visits of students (e.g. in research laboratories), which
should make the discussed issues – as well as the related RRI dimensions – more tangible.
In terms of material, students are strongly encouraged to use online tools for their work.
Keywords
Science education, train the trainer, Inquiry Based Science Education, public engagement, research-
based education

X X X Summer Schools, Workshops

X X

X X X

innovation
X X X X

Folder of the IRRESISTIBLE project: http://www.irresistible-project.eu/images/irr-
mat/IRRESISTIBLE_folder_EN_02-2014.pdf
22
Bertozzi, E., Fazio, C., Floriano, M. A., Levrini, O., Maniaci, R., Pecori, B., Venturi, M., & Apotheker, J.
(2014). Responsible Research and Innovation in Science Education : The IRRESISTIBLE Project. In C.
Fazio & R. M. Sperandeo Mineo (Eds.), Teaching/Learning Physics: Integrating Research into Practice.
Proceedings of the GIREP – MTPL 2014 International Conference (pp. 177–183). Palermo: Università
Degli Studi Di Palermo. Retrieved from http://www1.unipa.it/girep2014/proceedings/GIREP-
MPTL%202014%20Conference%20Proceedings.pdf or http://www1.unipa.it/girep2014/accepted-
papers-proceedings/154_Bertozzi.pdf
Gorghiu, G., Anghel, G. A., & Ion, R.-M. (2015). Students‘ Perception Related to a Responsible Research
and Innovation Demarche. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, 600–605.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.166
Maciejowska, I., & Apotheker, J. (2015). Teacher training at chemistry faculties – mutual benefits? A
case study based on the example of the IRRESISTIBLE project. Gamtamok Slinis Ugdymas / Natural
Science Education, 12(2), 104–111. Retrieved from http://oaji.net/articles/2015/514-1444756868.pdf
23
5.3 Database entry: “PACITA”
PACITA
Brief description
PACITA (Parliaments and Civil Society in Technology Assessment) aims at “increasing the capacity and
enhancing the institutional foundation for knowledge-based policy-making on issues involving science,
technology and innovation, mainly based upon the diversity of practices in Parliamentary Technology
Assessment (PTA)“ (http://www.pacitaproject.eu/). Science, civil society organizations, stakeholders,
citizens, parliaments and/or governments are engaged directly into activities of the project in order to
gather knowledge, create common results and foster the exchange between different actors.
Technology is seen as central in responding to the great challenges of society on the one hand. New
emerging technologies challenge regulations and established policies on the other hand. In order to
answer to those challenges, PACITA wants to spread Technology Assessment (TA) as a method to
provide and support “robust and knowledge-based policy making on societal topics related to science,
technology and innovation” (http://www.pacitaproject.eu/). In summer schools and practitioners’
meetings, and via the establishment of a TA portal, this method was taught to different stakeholders.

As “analytic and democratic practice which aims at broadening the knowledge base of policy decisions
by comprehensively analysing the socio-economic preconditions as well as the possible social,
economic and environmental impacts in the implementation of new technologies”
(http://www.pacitaproject.eu/about/), TA represents the principles of RRI. PACITA introduced the
method of Technology Assessment (TA) to different societal actors. Two summer schools and four
practitioners’ meetings were held, and a TA portal was established. The goal was to spread the method
of TA across Europe in order to enable different societal stakeholder to “facilitate the mobilisation of
PTA functions in their home countries” (http://www.pacitaproject.eu/action-plan-2/).
The target group of the summer schools were users and societal actors (scientists, stakeholder, civil
servants, MP/MEPs etc.). The practicioners’ meetings focused especially on project managers in PTA.
Experienced project leaders trained newcomers in scoping and framing issues, methodology,
networking and impact creation, and communication. The TA portal collects and provides TA material
and information, and lists related institutions, projects, experts and publications
(http://www.technology-assessment.info/index.php/welcome).
24

Documentation about the summer schools and the practitioners’ meeting are available online, but not
very extensive and they do not elaborate on teaching formats and methods used. The trainings were
conducted in a workshop setting and included a mix of lecturers, workshops, and activities. After
introductory talks and discussions, smaller working groups were formed.
In the summer schools, concrete topics (Renewable Energy Systems and Ageing Society) were
employed to demonstrate TA. The groups got different assignments and methods to work on fictive TA
projects. There were six workshop sessions: problem definition and research design, methodological
aspects, communication and dissemination, and a finalisation workshop before the two groups
presented their work to the plenary. This approach “allowed participants to discuss, experience, and
learn about the usefulness and the relevance of TA activities for their own activities and for their wider
organisational or national contexts” (http://www.pacitaproject.eu/summer-schools/).
In the four practitioners’ meeting, lasting three days each, different topics stood in the focus: theme
selection; methods; customers, participants and managers; as well as communication and impact
strategies. The meetings were similarly designed as the summer schools as a mixture of talks,
discussions, group work and presentations (http://www.pacitaproject.eu/practitioners-meetings-2/).
Keywords
(Parliamentary) Technology Assessment/Great societal challenges/Civil Society/(P)TA practitioners/TA
training

Not originally designed for HEI, but
could be adapted for MA or PhD

X X

X

innovation
X X X X

http://www.pacitaproject.eu/
25
http://www.pacitaproject.eu/summer-schools/
http://www.technology-assessment.info/index.php/welcome
26
5.4 Database entry: “ENRRICH”
ENRRICH
Brief description
The ENRRICH (Enhancing Responsible Research and Innovation through Curricula in Higher Education)
project aims to improve the capacity of students and staff at HEIs to embed RRI into curricula,
especially considering the research needs of society, represented by civil society organisations (CSOs).
In the course of the project, good practices and relevant resources will be identified, developed,
piloted, and disseminated. Furthermore, ENRRICH wants to enhance the exchange and debate about
implementing RRI in curricula across Europe.
For this purpose, a common understanding of RRI will be developed. RRI teaching practices and
material will be designed and piloted at HEIs. Science shops and similar institutions will be tested as
points of exchange to support the inclusion societal needs in HEI curricula. Exchange and dialogue,
mutual learning amongst project partners and on national, international and institutional level,
building partnerships and involving diverse stakeholders are in the focus of the ENRRICH project in
order to further their goal of including RRI into HEI curricula.

ENRRICH can be relevant for teaching RRI in two ways. First, good practices and case studies have been
collected by the consortium members that embedded RRI (or rri) in one way or the other into modules
and courses in different disciplines across Europe. Those exemplary courses are mostly on a bachelor
and master level and are focussed on enhancing CSO involvement. The best practices can be used as
input in and inspiration for the development of RRI training programmes and can be found here:
http://www.livingknowledge.org/projects/enrrich/enrrich-resources/.
Furthermore, ENRRICH developed and piloted new teaching material in higher education curricula
(“ENRRICH tool”), especially focusing on developing course material on BA and MA level, including
input of CSOs and science shops about research needs of society. This tool is aimed at educators to
incorporate RRI into existing courses and teaching, but not primarily to design new courses. The tool is
set up in a way that educators can review and reflect on their existing courses through a RRI
perspective. It does not build on the six RRI dimensions, but on the more holistic approach of four
competencies (anticipation, reflexivity, responsiveness and inclusiveness). See
http://www.livingknowledge.org/fileadmin/Dateien-Living-
Knowledge/Dokumente_Dateien/EnRRICH/D2.3_The_EnRRICH_Tool_for_Educators.pdf.
27

Best practices collected by ENRRICH range from extracurricular activities that do not earn ECTS credits
to different kind of university courses, but always involve some kind of reflexive and practical work,
often involving CSOs or other stakeholders from society in one way or the other. Accordingly, the
teaching formats vary in those displayed cases.
The train-the-trainer tool does not focus on any particular teaching formats, but encourages educators
to revise their already existing courses from an RRI perspective and incorporate the topic in those
courses in the future. ENRRICH distinguishes between a light and a deep approach of teaching RRI. The
first one can be seen as theoretical approach of teaching related theories, concepts, methods,
knowledge, cases studies in consideration of societal actors. The second one takes a more practical
approach of directly confronting students with those different actors, working together with them on
societal challenges.
As part of ENRRICH, the Community-Academic Research Links (CARL) initiative at the University College
Cork developed a community-based participatory research (CBPR) module, including related material
that can be used for free (http://www.ucc.ie/en/scishop/resources/module/#). It was originally aimed
to engage PhD students, but can be adapted to other settings. CBPR is seen as an approach that
embodies the principles of RRI.
Keywords
Best practice collection/train the trainer/holistic RRI/community-based participatory research/CSO
engagement

X X Train-the-trainer

X X X

X X

innovation
X X X X

28
http://www.livingknowledge.org/projects/enrrich/
http://www.livingknowledge.org/projects/enrrich/enrrich-resources/
http://www.ucc.ie/en/scishop/resources/module/#
Knowledge/Dokumente_Dateien/EnRRICH/D2.3_The_EnRRICH_Tool_for_Educators.pdf
29
5.5 Database entry: “PARRISE”
PARRISE
Brief description
PARRISE (Promoting Attainment of Responsible Research and Innovation in Science Education) is a
European Project which centres around the theme of “Socio-scientific inquiry based learning”. The
mission of the project is to provide an overall education format for both teachers and citizens, and to
establish a network/community of stakeholders with different professional profiles that would enable
transaction of knowledge and rising of awareness about socio-scientific inquiry based learning
application. The project is divided in seven work packages, of which the last is the evaluation. The aims
of the project are divided in different levels: the basic level with the RRI context, the citizen
engagement level which aims to critically examine a rapidly growing amount of scientific work, and the
teacher level where application of inquiry based learning is achieved. This project is closely related to
the HEIRRI project as it stresses the importance of RRI in education; however, it is primarily focused on
lower education levels (elementary schools).

PARRISE is important for RRI teaching and learning because it has a focus on four different RRI aspects:
responsible research and innovation in general, the idea of citizenship education, educational
approaches of teaching socio-scientific issues and inquiry based science education. It addresses
different real-world cases depending on education level. Some of the examples are recycling,
sustainable energy use, biotechnology and bioinformatics. Through these real-world examples,
students are taught how different RRI aspects are defined, merged and applied in everyday setting.
Also, they learn how to pose a question and search for different RRI aspects, allowing them to improve
their critical thinking and reflexivity. By forming questions they will be able to de-construct the concept
of RRI and think about it in a more creative way. The important parts of learning process are the
mistake which students make, that develops their critical thinking skills. Also, at the PARRISE website
stakeholders can find other projects related to RRI.

PARRISE’s main focus is on socio-scientific inquiry-based learning. Inquiry-based learning is a wider
concept than problem-based learning because it includes describing the problem and finding a
solution, supported by facilitator (in this case a teacher) who is asking questions in order to deepen the
students’ knowledge. However, socio-scientific inquiry-based learning can also include entire networks
of people who could contribute to knowledge development; including experts, students or citizens who
30
want to participate in solution finding for real-world problems. PARRISE aims to educate primary and
secondary school teachers in inquiry based learning skills with different programmes developed
specifically for that particular level, all through use of real-world cases.
Keywords
Socio-scientific inquiry based learning/teachers/RRI/science literacy

X X X Primary and secondary education
levels

X X X X

X

innovation
X X X X
http://www.parrise.eu/
31
5.6 Database entry: “The Round Table: A bottom-up approach to ethics”
The Round Table: A bottom-up approach to ethics
Felt, U., Fochler, M.; Müller, A., Strassnig, M. (2009): Unruly ethics: on the difficulties of a bottom-up
approach to ethics in the field of genomics. Public Understanding of Science 18 (3), 354-371.
Brief description
The Round Table is a bottom-up participatory approach for addressing ethical issues of research and
innovation, designed by the Swiss Science et Cité foundation (web). Felt et al. (2009) adapted this
design and implemented a Round Table on genome research, bringing together laypeople and
scientists. They then analysed the actors’ engagement and the unfolding discussions in this particular
setting.
The Round Table is a moderated, open format, promoting a dialogue between different actors. In this,
all participants can actively engage in discussions and none of them are bound to a certain role, e.g.,
scientists should not only be seen as experts giving information to laypeople, but also participate in the
debate. In the case of Felt et al. (2009), six whole-day-meetings were conducted over a period of seven
months. Fourteen laypeople and seven genome researchers participated in the roundtable discussions;
they also visited a laboratory. Together, the participants identified relevant issues in the first meetings,
which were then discussed afterwards with regards to their societal and ethical dimensions.

The Round Table could be used as an interactive and deliberative teaching approach that brings
together students and researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds as well as other societal
groups. The approach’s focus could be expanded beyond ethics to other dimensions of RRI.
Through participating in a Round Table, students could experience a public engagement approach and
thus learn about it from a participant’s perspective. Furthermore, they could expand their perspective
on research and innovation within their fields and start to reflect on their wider (ethical) implications.
Inter- and transdisciplinarity could be promoted as well as the constructive interaction and assessment
of the opinions and perspectives of other stakeholders.

The Round Table is based on the idea of mutual learning between laypeople and scientists. Through
bringing together these different groups, they both should better understand one another and
experience other perspectives. Furthermore, Felt et al. characterise their Round Table approach as a
32
“collective experiment in public participation (Felt et al. 2009: 358). Although their Round Table did not
take place in a higher education setting, such an “experiment” could also be implemented in a course-
setting with students from different disciplines and even laypeople (non-scientists).
Regarding their approach Felt et al. (2009) came to two main conclusions: (1) Arguments based on
“facts” are assessed superior to those based on “values” and (2) despite the open setting controversial
issues are often not addressed openly in plenary. In this regard, Felt et al. speak of “a process of
‘mutual taming’”.
Keywords
Round Table; mutual learning; public participation; ethics; engagement

X X

X X

X

innovation
X X X X

Felt, U., Fochler, M.; Müller, A., Strassnig, M. (2009): Unruly ethics: on the difficulties of a bottom-up
approach to ethics in the field of genomics. Public Understanding of Science 18 (3), 354-371.
Science et Cité (web): Dialogue science and society. http://www.science-et-cite.ch; accessed 26 July
2016.
33
5.7 Database entry: “The Neosocratic Dialogue: Discussing ethical questions of emerging
technologies”
The Neosocratic Dialogue: Discussing ethical questions of

emerging technologies
Griessler, E., & Littig, B. (2006): Neosokratische Dialoge zu ethischen Fragen der Xenotransplantation.
Ein Beitrag zur Bearbeitung ethischer Probleme in partizipativer Technikfolgenabschätzung. In E.
Buchinger & U. Felt (Eds.), Technik- und Wissenschaftssoziologie in Österreich. Stand und Perspektiven.
Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie. Sonderheft 8/2006 (pp. 131–157). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Brief description
The Neosocratic Dialogue (NSD) is an extension to participatory technology assessment (PTA) for
addressing ethical questions of emerging technologies. The paper by Griessler and Littig (2006)
presents NSD using the case of xenotransplantation (XTP). NSD is considered as a consensus-oriented
tool that allows stronger participation of citizens in debates on ethical questions around technologies.
A NSD consists of a group of six to twelve people supported by a moderator/facilitator.
The NSD aims at initiating a reflexive process on an ethical or philosophical question of a technological
development. The question also needs to have some personal relevance to the participants.
Accordingly the dialogue starts with a concrete experience of one participant, which is then discussed
by the group. The participants try to find a common decision and judgement to the example, while at
the same time they try to find the basic assumptions underlying this decision.

NSD could be used as a tool to initiate ethical reflection on R&I processes and potentially also
reflection on other RRI dimensions. The approach also has the potential to advance critical thinking of
students and could also work as a tool for strengthening interdisciplinary work, because NSD
empowers participants in their ability to argue consistently, to listen actively and to interact with other
people in a constructive way. A discussion group of an NSD consists of heterogeneous participants and
thus has the potential to be used in interdisciplinary courses in HEIs – e.g. on questions affecting
different fields of study.
Thus, a NSD could sensitise students for interdisciplinarity and raise awareness for different ethical
aspects in research and innovation processes. Moreover, NSD should also enable participants to learn
34
systematic ethical argumentation, which can be considered as an important tool for future
researchers.An NSD revolves around a question that should be relevant to all participants and is thus
not determined to a specific topic. In HEI teaching, discussed questions could be chosen from the
respective field of study and thus could be very tangible to the students.

NSD not only aims at strengthening reflexivity of participants regarding ethical questions, it also tries to
overcome the shortcoming of other similar tools which often disregard laypeople or groups who are
not trained in the field of the discussed question. Moreover, the goal of NSD is to find consensus
through collaborative deliberation in a balanced dialogue. As a teaching format in an RRI course, it
could therefore be a useful tool for strengthening students’ reflexivity in their own research
practices/in their research/study fields. Additionally, it also trains participants (respectively students in
HEIs) in systematic ethical argumentation and allows them to improve their dialogical abilities.
NSD is related to the pedagogical approach of inquiry-based learning; however, as e.g. Lam (2011)
argues, NSD is more systematic than IBL as it follows more concrete steps. NSD further seems to be
suitable for addressing real-life cases, as it aims to discuss questions that are personally relevant to the
group participants.
While participants of an NSD do not need to have specific knowledge on the discussed question, we
nonetheless suggest using such an approach at the Master level or above as students are already more
familiar with their subject and research processes.
Keywords
Neo-Socratic Dialogue, methodological approach, teaching method, ethics, reflexivity

X X

X X

X X

innovation
X X X X
35

Birnbacher, D. (1999). The Socratic method in teaching medical ethics: Potentials and limitations.
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 99(2), 219–224.
Lam, F. (2011). The Socratic Method as an Approach to Learning and Its Benefits (Senior Honors
Thesis). Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Retrieved from
http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1126&context=hsshonors
Littig, B. (2004). The neo-Socratic dialogue. A method of teaching the ethics of sustainable
development. In C. Galea (Ed.), Teaching Business Sustainability. Volume 1: From Theory to Practice
(pp. 240–252). Sheffield: Greenfield Publishing.
36
5.8 Database entry: “Teaching resources: Engineering, Technology and Society”
Teaching resources “Engineering, Technology and Society”

University of Western Australia
Brief description
“Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology and Society” is a publication by Professor Caroline Baillie
(University of Western Australia) that gathers a series of lectures to foster interdisciplinarity among
engineers and scientists. That is, it wants to promote an understanding on the inclusive nature of both
professions by drawing on multiple fields. The book is addressed particularly to practicing engineers
and human resource trainers, but also faculty members of engineering, science and social sciences
schools. They can help trainers promote in-depth debates and research in the classroom.

This is an exemplary case for the HEIRRI database because it is centered on the idea that technologies
need to be inclusive as they affect us all, “regardless of national boundaries, socio-economic status,
gender, race and ethnicity, or creed”. Also, the series become a platform for the debate of “important
and sometimes controversial lectures to encourage discussion, reflection and further understanding”.
They combine expertise in sociology, political economics, philosophy of science, history, engineering,
engineering education, participatory research, development studies, sustainability, psychotherapy,
policy studies, and epistemology, and they aim at being relevant to all engineers around the world.
The series of lectures have been published by the author with the notion that, in order for engineers to
be able to “make appropriate decisions and to co-create ideas and innovations within and among the
complex networks of communities which currently exist”, they need to realise the social and natural
implications of their decisions, the significance of their work and also they have to take responsibility,
developing an “ability to respond to emerging needs of all people across cultures”.

The teaching format is based on lectures, which give ideas and tools to introduce the way engineers
relate to their communities, “drawing on scholarship from science and technology studies,
globalisation and development studies, as well as work in science communication and dialogue”. It also
promotes critical thinking in engineering in order to make ethical and responsible decisions. The
publication also provides case studies of everyday issues such as water, garbage and alarm clocks.
37
Some of the lectures are: “Engineering Ethics: Peace, Justice, and the Earth”, “Mining and
Communities: Understanding the Context of Engineering Practice “, “Engineering and War: Militarism,
Ethics, Institutions, Alternatives”, “The Garbage Crisis: A Global Challenge for Engineers”, “Engineers,
Society, and Sustainability”, “A Hybrid Imagination: Science and Technology in Cultural Perspective”, or
“Tragedy in the Gulf: A Call for a New Engineering Ethic”, among many others.
Keywords
Engineering, Technology, Society, Lectures, Interdisciplinarity

X

X X X

X

innovation
X X

http://www.morganclaypool.com/toc/ets/1/1
http://www.morganclaypool.com/toc/ets/1/1#lecturesAvailableOnline
https://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Society-Synthesis-Engineers-Technology/dp/1598296620
38
5.9 Database entry: “Community-University Research Alliances (CURA)”
Community-University Research Alliances (CURA)
Brief description
The Community-University Research Alliances (CURAs) programme was created in January 1999 by the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, which is a federal agency that promotes
and supports university-based research and training in the social sciences and humanities. Nearly 100
CURAs have been launched since 1999, creating alliances between community organizations and HEI's
and fostering mutual learning, training and innovative research.
A CURA is based on the principle of an equal partnership between organizations from the community
and one or more HEI. The specific objectives of CURAs are:
- To promote sharing of knowledge, resources and expertise between post-secondary institutions
and organizations in the community;
- To enrich research, teaching methods and curricula in post-secondary institutions;
- To reinforce community decision-making and problem-solving capacity;
- To enhance students’ education and employability by means of diverse opportunities to build
their knowledge, expertise and work skills through hands-on research and related experience.

CURA’s are based on mutual learning, training and innovative research. In each alliance formed,
partners are free to jointly define their research activities and the participatory arrangements under
which individual researchers and research teams will carry out those activities. The people who
designed the original conception of CURA were inspired, among others, by the experience of Science
Shops in Europe.
In short, a CURA is an equal partnership between organizations from the community and one or more
HEI, which is in charge of providing coordination and support for diversified research activities centred
on areas of mutual importance for the parties. In that sense, and to meet the needs of the two parties
involved, each CURA activity has a research component, an education and training component and a
knowledge-mobilization component. Knowledge mobilization is based on two ideas: first, that valid
knowledge is produced by many actors outside universities and research centres; and second, that
research should aim at producing results that are relevant beyond intrinsic academic interest, that
contribute to better policy-making and bring benefits beyond monetary terms.
39

The pedagogical method of CURAs is a university-based approach centred on mutual learning and
participatory research. Students can benefit from the experience of practical internships in
communities, which at the same time, also benefit from the interaction. The two parties learn how to
work together effectively. This methodology is a participatory research approach, and training is
focused on social sciences and humanities.
According to the document “Participation of Civil Society Organisations in Research” (2009), most
research teams participating in CURAs found it hard to evaluate the middle- and long-term results of
their activities with regard to the social, cultural, or economic development of communities, or on
policies, or on teaching methods. The document points out that CURA succeeded at improving the
resources and information flows within community networks and also at helping community
organisations to develop sustainable relationships with one another.
Keywords
Community, university-based, alliance, mutual, learning.

X X Alliances between community
organizations and HEI's

X X X X

X

innovation
X

Knowledge/Library/Project_reports/STACS_Final_Report-Partic.research_2009.pdf
http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/programs-programmes/cura-aruc-eng.aspx
Case: https://crwdp.ca/en/council-canadians-disabilities-community-university-research-alliances-
40
cura-project
5.10 Database entry: “STIPS”
STIPS
Brief description
“STiPS: Program for Education and research on Science and Technology in Public Sphere”, is a
postgraduate minor (sub-major programme) that fosters integrated design capacity within the field of
Nanoscience. This programme is a human resource development initiative jointly offered by Osaka
University and Kyoto University.
STiPS was created in January 2012 under the Science for RE-designing Science, Technology and
Innovation Policy (SciREX) program of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and
Technology. It is dedicated to research and education on ethical, legal, and social issues of science and
technology and is committed to the development of policy making through SciREX.

This programme is exemplary for RRI teaching and learning because it enhances flexibility in terms of
enrolment and promotes interdisciplinarity. STiPS aims to educate in order to “transcend the borders
of specializations, understand issues related to science, technology and society from various angles,
and contribute to the process of policy making” by linking academia, policy and society. It focuses on
education and gives participants the opportunity to become involved in public engagement in the
fields of science and technology.

The pedagogical methods of this programme are based on hands-on experiences in social collaboration
between the academia and the social sectors. By promoting participation of citizens and NGOs/Non-
profit Organizations in public activities, STiPS is contributing to the development of science,
technology, and innovation policies. It is also helping to “draft and plan research and development that
truly reflect the needs, situations, and issues of local society”.
Keywords
STiPS, Nanoscience, Osaka, Kyoto, postgraduate
41

X (postgraduate) X (postgraduate)

X X X

X

innovation
X X

http://www.stips.kyoto-u.ac.jp/stips_e
http://stips.jp/english/
42
5.11 Database entry: “Teaching engineering ethics across international and academic borders”
Teaching Engineering ethics across international and academic

borders
Sunderland; M. E.; Taebi, B.; Carson, C.; Kastenberg, W. (2014): Teaching global perspectives:
engineering ethics across international and academic borders. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1/2,
228-239.
Brief description
The University of Berkeley implemented a pilot programme on embedding ethics in the centre of
engineering curricula. The programme was designed as an intensive, five-day summer course and
brought together graduate students from different disciplines and countries.
The first day was used to discuss different perspectives on engineering ethics. Practical examples of
research opportunities were introduced. On the second day, researchable ethical questions were
commonly developed and worked on with the goal of writing research papers by the participating
engineering, philosophy and social science students interdisciplinarily.
The third day included a field trip to strengthen the personal relationship amongst students and
between students and teachers. On the fourth day, theory and practice of collaborating across
disciplines were discussed on an individual, conceptual and institutional level. The last day was
originally dedicated to discussing teaching engineering ethics, but  following the wishes of the
students  was used to further work on the research projects.

The programme is relevant as an example of trying to implement ethics in the core of a discipline – in
this case engineering – by engaging students from different fields and highlighting practical ways to do
so. The students were encouraged to work interdisciplinarily and to deal with views and perspectives
of other disciplines. By identifying engineering ethics research opportunities, the field was pointed out
as a viable career option.
Sunderland et al. (2014) highlight still existing barriers for engineers who want to deal with research
ethics: there are the disciplinary boundaries of relevant journals that are dedicated either to
engineering or ethics, but not to the connection of both. Often, activities related to research ethics
have a low institutional status. They also emphasised the increasing demand to work interdisciplinary
43
and include ethical considerations into research processes.

In the programme at Berkeley, students were seen as ‘co-inquirers’ in developing engineering ethics
research and teaching. Their perspective and capacity was considered important in contributing to the
development of effective pedagogical programmes in R&I. The creation of a safe space for “non-
academic” discussions about engineering ethics, which are often unwelcome in academic settings,
helped to facilitate this contribution.

The described course takes the format of a summer school for graduate students, lasting five days. In
this week of collaboration, a space was created for dealing with different aspects of ethics in
engineering. The programme was set up internationally, interdisciplinarily and cross-methodological.
Students were encouraged to learn from and with each other. Traditional academic hierarchies and
divisions between students of different disciplines and between students and teachers were broken
down in order encourage different perspectives on (teaching) ethics in engineering. The emphasis of
personal relationships between all participants was meant to strengthen the interdisciplinary and
international exchange.
The programme was student-centred, collaborative inquiry in a non-hierarchical environment was used
as a method of knowledge production. A problem-based learning model prompted students to follow
their own ideas and research questions in the field of engineering ethics. Students were encouraged to
articulate their perspective in their own language that did not necessarily need to be academic.
Students’ perspectives were seen as critical for the development of effective educational programmes.
Engaging students’ emotions about ethical issues and questions in engineering was used as a method
to connect to the subject and show their role in moral decision-making and learning. In that way, ethics
should be experienced as integral part of engineering and not as something marginal.
Keywords
Engineering ethics/interdisciplinary collaboration/student engagement/graduate education/emotional
involvement

X X

X X

X
44

innovation
X

Sunderland; M. E.; Taebi, B.; Carson, C.; Kastenberg, W. (2014): Teaching global perspectives:
engineering ethics across international and academic borders. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1/2,
228-239.
Roeser, S. 2012. “Emotional Engineers: Toward Morally Responsible Design.” Science and Engineering
Ethics 18 (1): 103–115.
Sunderland, M. E. 2013. “Using Student Engagement to Relocate Ethics to the Core of the Engineering
Curriculum.” Science and Engineering Ethics 2013, 118.
Sunderland, M. E. 2014. “Taking Emotion Seriously: Meeting Students Where They Are.” Science and
Engineering Ethics 20 (1): 183–195.
45
5.12 Database entry: “TRREE”
TRREE: Training and Resources in Research Ethics Evaluation
Brief description
Training and Resources in Research Ethics Evaluation (TREE) is a consortium made of stakeholders from
Northern and Southern countries. It aims to provide basic training, and build capacity, regarding ethics
of health research involving humans by promoting highest ethical standards and the welfare of
participants. TRREE proposes to achieve this goal primarily by developing a training programme with
local collaborators. It also provides free-of-charge access to e-Learning (a distance learning program
and certification on research ethics evaluation) and e-Resources (a participatory web-site with
international, regional and national regulatory and policy resources). The courses are designed for self-
learning, and deal with ethics in general and/or specific ethical problems.

TRREE is a very important tool for learning about research ethics. The modules are accessible in several
languages, allowing for a wider audience. After passing the exam, every student receives a certificate
which is certified by several medical organizations. The aim of the TRREE is to develop knowledge and
skills of those participants who are engaged in management or conducting of research ethics
evaluation and research partnerships. Also, it is a tool for dissemination of knowledge among countries
that participate in the project. Additionally, through the ethics training, the participants can highly
improve their reflexivity.

This e-programme consists of six lecture-based modules supplemented with real world examples.
Although initially developed for African countries, the project is expanding to other countries. The main
advantage of the programme is learning at one’s own pace. The disadvantage, from a RRI standpoint, is
that it describes only a single RRI aspect in detail (ethics), while other RRI aspects remain neglected.
However, in terms of research ethics it is a very user friendly and interesting material. TRREE is the
most suitable as an introductory e-course for novices in the field of ethics. The students start with the
first module where general themes in research ethics are described, and then proceed to the more
specific themes. This can lead to the development of critical reasoning and serve as basis for further
application in other fields.
46
Keywords
Ethics/e-learning/open access/beginners/health research

X X X

X

X X

innovation
X X
http://elearning.trree.org/
47
5.13 Database entry: “Public Engagement Training”
Public Engagement Training
Brief description
The public engagement training is project developed at the London’s Global University UCL. The aim of
the project is to raise awareness of public engagement in higher education institutions and to promote
public engagement in scientific research. On the UCL website, stakeholders may find information about
the project and public engagement in general. One of public engagement training activities is
connecting students` projects with the lay public to foster interaction and cooperation among them.
Also, the public engagement training programme has the informal interaction called the Bright club,
which is a stand-up comedy show where scientists are performers and talk about their own work. The
target population are people 20-50 years old, while the performance themes constantly change in
order to keep the event interesting and to allow new performers on the stage. This project covers only
a part of RRI themes, but it thoroughly examines the aspects of public engagement.

The project website offers huge spectrum of information about public engagement in general. Also, it
provides additional resources and links where stakeholders can expand their knowledge and/or
engagement in scientific research. The website is user-friendly; suitable even to younger students not
familiar with public engagement. Furthermore, experienced researchers may benefit from public
engagement training because it keeps them up with new projects, and on Creating Connections event
they get the chance to introduce other researchers in their field (or any other) and find research
themes which could be of mutual interest. Furthermore, visitors can subscribe to a newsletter at Public
Engagement Training website allowing them to be up to date with the new events.

Public engagement training is the most suitable tool for e-learning of public engagement development.
However, younger students will most likely need guidelines for the website itself. Before jumping to
project themes and creating connections, the public engagement lecture must be listened to. For more
experienced students and researchers, the Bright club and Focus on the positive events may be a better
source of new information and ideas. Also, it allows for direct comments of stakeholders. Project
engagement website provides a lot of examples of public engagement and that can be a basis for
problem based learning. There are also guidelines for project managers (or students) on how to
improve public engagement of own projects and how to evaluate them. In short, Public engagement
48
website can be very helpful tool for public engagement learning if it is combined with lectures where
themes and the importance of public engagement are thoroughly explained.
Keywords
Public engagement/training/UCL/Bright club/learning

X X X

X

X X

innovation
X X X X
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/public-engagement
49
5.14 Database entry: “Service Learning Programme
Service Learning Programme
Brief description
Service Learning (SL) is an educational proposal that combines learning processes and community
service in a single project, in which the participants learn while working on real issues from their
community. At Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV) the initiative started in 2011-2012 and it encourages
students to make an active commitment to their social surroundings. It is a complex activity that links
community service to the learning of content, competencies, skills and values through reflexive
practice.
The aim of the Service Learning programme is to provide reflective practice since it establishes
connections between students service experiences and the academic learning curriculum. The program
attempts to combine community service and work experience with the academic curriculum thereby
fostering reflective and responsive students that are able to understand how to positively impact their
environment. The program additionally is able to enhance the social function of the university because
of the close interlinkage with the local community and the community-based research that is a product
of the programme.

The Service-Learning is a training project with social benefits for the community that combines societal
needs with higher educational institutions. It is an educative proposal merging from learning processes
and civic engagement, combined within one project. In addition to this, the Service-Learning aims to
provide reflective practice because it establishes connections between students’ service experiences
and the academic learning curriculum. The participants are doing training while responding to an
actual community need that is recognized by the community and they are able to improve their local
community through their training and research. Because Service Learning combines academia with
societal actors there is a strong focus on developing interdisciplinary skills among the students.
In other words, the program aims to combine community service and curricular learning for the
students as well as performing research. The programme raises the public awareness of the students
participating and their civic awareness. By participating in the project, students are made aware of how
they can positively impact their community.

Service learning combines the learning process of the students with community services thereby
50
increasing the students’ awareness of societal needs. In the academic year of 2014-2015 the students
at Universitat Rovira i Virgili have completed 167,000 social service hours in their local community. The
innovative teaching format of Service Learning where research, teaching and community service are
intertwined enhances the student’s civic engagement while fostering interdisciplinary skills. It further
strengthens the relationship between the university and the local community, since the university is
conducting research that directly benefits the local community. The fulfillment of the universities social
responsibility towards its local community is heightened due to this teaching method.
Because the programme focuses on real-life cases there is a high degree of stakeholder inclusion
incorporated into the programme since the students are required to both identify community needs
and contact the relevant societal actors. This method encourages the students to maintain a close
relationship with the local community and enhances their public engagement. As of last year 101
community organizations were involved in various Service Learning courses at Universitat Rovira i
Virgili.
Keywords
Society, interdisciplinarity, doing by learning, engagement, collaboration

X X

X X X

X

innovation
X X X
http://www.urv.cat/aprenentatgeservei/en_index.html
Video Service Learning Programme at URV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7QQIMsoH3Q
Framework document for the Service-Learning programme Universitat Rovira i Virgili:

http://www.urv.cat/media/upload//arxius/Aprenentatge%20Servei/DM_APS_eng.pdf
51
https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/service_learning_programme_at_unive
http://www.linkinglondon.ac.uk/downloads/glas/glas-cce-deliverables/CCE_CS_Six_URV-Service-
Learning%20Case%20Study.pdf
52
5.15 Database entry: “Ethics in Life Sciences”
Ethics in Life Sciences
Brief description
The course “Ethics in Life Sciences” is a four-week programme for masters’ degrees that provides
students with a toolbox of ethical instruments for research projects on ethics taught at Vrije
Universiteit Amsterdam. Throughout the session, students enhance their critical and ethical reflexion
and become equipped to handle ethical dilemma for their future careers. This is a compulsory course
in all Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences (FALW) Master programmes, except Health Sciences and
Neurosciences.
The main objective of the course “Ethics in Life Sciences” is to provide with a toolbox of ethical
instruments to properly analyze moral problems related to research in the life sciences; to acquire
conceptual knowledge of the central concepts in applied philosophy and professional ethics; to
challenge an ethical reflection on one’s life science specialization and to open it for an impartial and
constructive discussion; to exercise a team based project to prepare and execute a moral dialogue; and
finally, to acquire the necessary skills to handle ethical issues in an accountable manner, as a
professional academic beyond one's own inclinations and prejudgments.

This case is relevant for RRI teaching because it connects two disciplines like Ethics and Life Sciences,
and promotes a reflection and debate on the issue. The content of the course has been built based on
the idea that life sciences’ research generate vital knowledge for society and that, therefore,
professionals should be accountable for their decisions, experimental designs and presentation of
results.
This is not a course only focused on the RRI concept, but particularly on Ethics applied to the Life
Sciences, during which the RRI concept is explained and discussed. The topic of “Ethics” is presented in
a way that leads to understanding and making R&I more responsible, and in any case Ethics are
intended to be perceived as an obstacle. Students are encouraged to engage in moral dialogues and
ethical reflections and dilemmas, raising awareness and stimulating them into thinking that ethical
considerations are a vital part of being a researcher.

53
The course format is structured with cases of technology ethics and medical ethics, with Problem-
based Learning (PBL), simulations by role playing exercises on real research protocols, and also with
small group training projects and engaging in ethical debates among teams.
“Ethics in the Life Sciences” is a four-week fulltime course that counts as 3 ECTS. The total 80 hours are
distributed as follows: 13 hours in lectures, 17 hours in work groups, 24 hours in group assignments, 20
hours in reading (self-working), 2 hours doing the exam, and 4 hours in the presentation. The course is
evaluated through the exam (50%), written and verbal execution of the ethical dialogue (40%) and also
through the degree of intellectual participation in the workgroups (10%).
Keywords
Ethics, Life, Sciences, Course, Technology

X

X

X

innovation
X X
http://www.vu.nl/nl/studiegids/2015-2016/master/a-b/biomedical-
sciences/index.aspx?view=module&origin=50051475&id=50043929
54
5.16 Database entry: “Theory of Science and Ethics”
Theory of Science and Ethics
Brief description
The course “Theory of Science and Ethics” addresses the relationship between science and society
while encouraging students to critically reflect upon their own research. Students enhance their critical
reflection of ethical issues by offering intensive supervision of paper discussions. The course aims at
giving an overview of key topics in theory of science, such as the relationship between science and
society, normative issues related to science, and ethical issues in science (including research ethics),
and philosophy of science. It also aims at offering students an arena and opportunity to reflect critically
upon their own research.
The course is equivalent to 10 ECTS and is imparted at PhD level at Bergen University. It is available for
all students enrolled in the PhD programme at the Faculty of Humanities and at NHH/Professional and
Intercultural Communication.

The course consists of four parts: a 4-day seminar in theory of science and ethics, the supervision of a
paper discussing problems in theory of science and/or ethics relevant for the student's own project, a
presentation and discussion of the paper, and the commenting upon 2 papers written by peers.
The learning outcomes expected to be achieved upon the completion of the course and the
presentation and discussion of the paper, are knowledge of general problems of theory of science and
ethics and the ability to identify and discuss in detail problems in theory of science and/or ethics that
are directly relevant to the student’s project (or to the field of study in which the project belongs).

The teaching methods consist in a four-day seminar with lectures, discussions, group and individual
assignment. It is accompanied by the supervision of papers in groups and/or individually, plus the
discussion of paper with the assessment committee members and peers.
The mandatory requirements for the course include preparing for and participating in the seminar in
the theory of science and ethics, writing a paper in theory of science and ethics (submitted
electronically), taking part in paper supervision, and providing with comments of papers produced by
two peers after their presentations. The evaluation is done by the assessment committee after
attending the paper presentation (public lecture of 30 minutes of duration) and the following
discussion among committee members and peers (for 45 minutes).
55
Keywords
Ethics, Science, Society, Philosophy, PhD

X

X X

X

innovation
X

http://www.uib.no/en/svt/21873/course-description-vithf900-theory-science-and-ethics
http://www.uib.no/en/svt/21463/mnf490-course-theory-science-and-ethics-faculty-mathematics-and-
natural-sciences-uob-fall
56
5.17 Database entry: “Contextualizing Nanotechnology Education: Fostering a Hybrid Imagination”
Contextualizing Nanotechnology Education: Fostering a Hybrid

Imagination.
Brief description
This course fosters a so-called ‘hybrid imagination’, as an approach to improve the ability of students
to think across disciplines. It is based on the idea that, in “the context of worldwide economic and
environmental crisis, it is increasingly important that nanotechnology, genomics, media engineering
and other fields of ‘technoscience’ with immense societal relevance are taught in ways that promote
social responsibility and that educational activities are organized so that science and engineering
students will be able to integrate the ‘contextual knowledge’ they learn into their professional,
technical–scientific identities and forms of competence” (Jamison & Mejlgaard 2010).
Aalborg University (Denmark) believes that a socio-cultural approach is needed to be able to properly
contextualize learning in a way that contributes to a greater sense of social responsibility on the part of
scientists and engineers. They state: “the social, political and environmental challenges facing science
and engineering in the world today require the fostering of what we have come to call a ‘hybrid
imagination’, mixing scientific–technical skills with a sense of social responsibility or global citizenship,
if science and engineering are to help solve social problems rather than create new ones” (Jamison &
Mejlgaard 2010).

The aim of the course is to give students in engineering programmes, specifically in nanotechnology
and biotechnology, a sense of the broader context of their field. It invites reflection on the societal
implications of their work, and provides a set of skills needed for understanding and analysing the
responsibilities engineers have in their professional work.

The course is taught as a mandatory component during the first year of the Bachelor’s programme. It is
based on Problem-based learning as a guiding pedagogical approach. Importantly, the course is
integrated with the student’s semester project report, which has a strong technical focus but which
should also cover the students’ ‘contextual knowledge’, acquired during the course and through the
project work. Normally there is an empirical focus and use of appropriate social science methods in this
regards, such as interviews with stakeholders, focus groups, or survey based data collection. The
project report is supervised by scientists and social scientists together, and the examination is also
carried out in collaboration.
57
Keywords
Hybrid imagination, technoscience, science and engineering education, contextual knowledge

X

X

X

innovation
X X
http://vbn.aau.dk/en/publications/contextualizing-nanotechnology-education(d029e310-ddc7-11de-
88f9-000ea68e967b).html
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09505430903512911
58
5.18 Database entry “Dilemma game `Professionalism and Integrity in Research´”
Dilemma game ´Professionalism and Integrity in Research´
Brief description
The Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) developed the Dilemma Game, which helps staff and
students discuss dilemmas and stimulates them to find solutions. This game contains many common
integrity issues. It also offers participants the opportunity to formulate dilemmas from their own
practice.
Besides the existing general Dilemma Game, a game specifically focusing on Professionalism and
Integrity in Research was developed as one of the initiatives of the EUR Taskforce Scientific Integrity. It
uses many common dilemmas in science and invites discussion on the subject. The game lets
participants consider, choose and defend (and possibly reconsider) alternative courses of action
regarding a realistic dilemma regarding professionalism and integrity in research. Participants will also
come to appreciate the dilemmas that others are faced with, how they resolve them and the reasoning
behind these solutions, fostering to help one another to find solutions for their own dilemmas.
The dilemma game is available (in English) in a ‘tangible’ box-format. There is also an online version
which you can find here.

By exposing to such dilemmas in the context of a critical dialogue, the game creates an open forum
supporting participants in further developing their own “moral compass”. This open learning space also
bares individual researchers to dilemmas in a group discussion and raises awareness for and to develop
proposals to help maintain scientific professionalism and integrity.
Moreover, the 75 dilemmas included in the game have been collected through sessions at different
EUR schools and among researchers who use different research strategies and who are in different
stages of their careers. In that way, the game develops a set of dilemmas that are relevant to a diverse
population of researchers.
While these dilemmas are based on actual cases, they are recognizable and relevant to many
researchers, stimulating a more open and critical discussion of their respective norms and behaviours.
The outcomes of the debate sessions will be also helpful for a diverse population of researchers
interested principles of good scientific teaching and research.

59
The pedagogical methodology of the Dilemma game ‘Professionalism and integrity in research’ has a
clear participatory approach based on gamification, focused on scientific integrity research. Depending
on the objectives, it may be used primarily as an exercise to let people exchange opinions and
experiences, or also as a step towards defining more formally defined principles, on for instance co-
authorship. The Dilemma game operates as an inquiry-based learning platform in which students
acquire higher order thinking skills within research ethics.
It is also based on real-life cases and it lets participants come up with their own dilemmas, after playing
a number of dilemmas from the game.
The game can be used in a variety of teaching and scenarios in Higher Education institutions, such as in
a course setting, for instance for a group of PhD students, or in a research strategy meeting of a
department or institute.
Keywords
Gamification, university-based, mutual learning, scientific integrity, critical discussion

X X X

X X

X

innovation
X X X X
General info: http://www.eur.nl/english/eur/publications/integrity/dilemma_game/

Download Dilemma Game: http://www.eur.nl/fileadmin/ASSETS/ieb/integriteit/dilemmagame-mrg.pdf
Final report of the Taskforce Scientific Integrity Erasmus University Rotterdam October 2013
http://www.eur.nl/fileadmin/ASSETS/ieb/integriteit/Taskforce_Scientific_Integrity_EUR.pdf
TEDed video ‘Gamification of education’ http://ed.ted.com/on/uk36wtoi
60
5.19 Database entry: “Camera drones in education"
Camera drones in education
Brief description
As part of the Bachelor Programme in New Media at the Department of Information Science and
Media Studies at University of Bergen they offer the first innovative drone course for media students.
In the course the students are taught how to responsibly utilize visual technology such as drone usage
as a journalistic tool.
The course is offered by ViSmedia (Responsible Adoption of Visual Surveillance Technologies in the
News Media) a research group funded by the Norwegian Research council. The drone course is
experimental and stimulates students and teachers alike in the innovative use of camera work with
smart drones with its visually technical challenges.
As part of the course “Camera drones in education” the ViSmedia researchers guide the innovation
process by discussions and evaluations with the students in a series of four workshops. Finally the
media students have the responsibility designing a prototype for drone journalism as part of their
innovation pedagogical approach.

The aim of the course is to teach the students to conduct responsible journalism while implementing
new technology. The course applies RRI teaching through participatory learning by making the students
aware of the implications their practice has and by making the students anticipate and systematically
reflect on this implication. The learning outcomes of the course are that students make independent
decisions regarding drone flying and the risks involved, that they consider the potential of using a new
technology and finally that they create genuinely novel and valuable technologies for journalism.
In relation to the usage of new technology in media the course explores two essential aspects of
responsibility. The course is focused on avoiding danger hence the students are made aware that using
drones can potentially be dangerous for the pilot as well as bystanders. Secondly the course is focused
on the principles journalism. That journalism is bound by ethical requirements and expectations
regarding accountability, relevance and that the usage of journalism drone filming should not be used
as a surveillance activity. When using drone filming the students must present a transparent
operational manual with a clearly stated purpose.

The project employs the approach of "innovation pedagogics" in which the students are taught to be
creative and daring. Students and researchers work together in this experimental course, where the
61
practical aspects of the course help students identify new areas of usage and applications for the
projects they are involved with.
Throughout the course the ViSMedia research guide the innovation process by continuously discussing
and evaluating the project with the students, thereby fostering a hierarchy free environment for the
students to unfold their creativity. The teaching format of the course is group-based and at the end of
the bachelor programme, every student will gain experience in a company where they will practise
innovation in a real work situation.
Keywords
Innovative journalism, responsible communication, participatory, experimental, new technology

X

X X

X

innovation
X X
http://www.uib.no/en/news/99154/media-students-become-drone-experts
http://www.uib.no/en/infomedia/94035/vismedia-%E2%80%93-visual-surveillance-technologies-and-
journalism
https://issuu.com/universitetet_i_bergen/docs/uib_magazine_2016_issuu/34
https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/smart_drones_for_journalism._teachi
62
5.20 Database entry: “Erasmus Intensive Program in Sustainable Technology Development”
Erasmus Intensive Program in sustainable Technology

Development
Brief description
The International Seminar on Sustainable Technology Innovation is a course centered in the framework
of the master of Sustainability at the UPC-Barcelona Tech University and financed by the ERASMUS
Intensive Program scheme. The course is organized around sustainability topics that are analysed
through case studies situated in different contexts ranging from local to global issues. Since 2008 the
course has dealt with issues such as water sanitation and treatment, overfishing and marine ecosystem
degradation. The main aims of the project are among other aspects to increase the understanding of a
sustainable development in the long term and the role of technology embedded in systems, increase
the capability to apply foresighting, forecasting and backcasting and to contribute to the development
of scientific work competences of the students.
The course is structured in different phases, where the students firstly analyse a sustainability issue in
their own country context, then the students are grouped in multidisciplinary teams to discuss an
international context and finally the course is run over a two week period in Barcelona and evaluated.
The course has been ongoing for seven years with participation of more than 250 students, 40
lecturers and 80 stakeholders from 18 countries.

The course employs a problem-based learning approach with back-casting as its primary method. By
adopting a back-casting method the students across intercultural boundaries must attempt to access
the feasibly of a desired future together. This is done through constructive-learning activities that are
focused on the connections between technology development, environmental problems and societal
change. The aim is to escape from only technological solutions and to explore whether the real
sustainability changes in sustainable issues come from creativity, interdisciplinary, systemic and critical
thinking.
A core element of the course is the focus on transdisciplinary competences since the students are from
different countries and usually have different academic background it is essential to foster
interdisciplinary skills in order to achieve the best sustainable strategies. The course exploits
community-oriented cases thereby bringing together academia and various stakeholders as well as
social organisations from society in an attempt to develop sustainable strategies.
63

The course is situated in an international environment and since the creation of the course students
from 39 different nationalities have participated. The content of the lectures and dialogues is defined
by a transdisciplinary committee in order to ensure the most innovative and updated lectures on each
issue are provided.
The course adopts a problem-based learning approach with stakeholders’ dialogues and discussions at
the centre since this approach fosters interdisciplinary and intercultural awareness among students.
The course employs scenario methodologies to the case studies in order to set up the most
contextualized sustainability strategies. The problem-based approach is combined with a back-casting
method, where the students through a deliberative process must define a desired future solution to
the sustainability issue together.
Keywords
Sustainability, multidisciplinary, critical thinking, creativity, long term

X X

X X

X

innovation
X
https://is.upc.edu/seminaris-i-jornades/seminaris/std-2014
https://is.upc.edu/seminaris-i-jornades/seminaris/-1
https://is.upc.edu/?set_language=en
https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/multicultural_constructive_communit
64
Segalàs, Jordi & Tejedor, Gemma ”ERASMUS Intensive Programme in Sustainable Technology
Development: Multicultural Constructive Community Learning courses for EESD applying Backcasting”
Engineering Education for Sustainable Development, Cambrigde, UK. September 22-25, 2013.
http://www-csd.eng.cam.ac.uk/proceedings-of-the-eesd13-conference-cambridge-2013-v-2/eesd13-
published-papers/segalas-j.pdf
65
5.21 Database entry: “Walking the City: Social Interactions in Learning through the Urban
Environment”
Walking the City: Social Interactions in Learning through the

Urban Environment
Brief description
‘Walking the city’ is a teaching and research inspiring practice organised by way of visits and city tours,
developed at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Escola Tècnica Superior d'Arquitectura de
Barcelona in 2004 with the purpose of developing new was to understand the city and urban spaces.
The aim of the programme is to promote the active perception and the profound assimilation of urban
experiences in the field of teaching urbanism and deepening the students’ knowledge of the city. By
utilizing public space, neighbourhoods and social housing as themes the programme introduce the
students to city planning as well as the sociology and history of the city. The programme encompasses
different disciplines such as architecture, urbanism, sociology, history and as part of its components.
The project has won prestigious awards for quality in university teaching and the experience has been
exported to other universities such as Rome, Medellin, Montevideo and Lisbon as well as resulting a
book “Walking the City: Barcelona as an urban experience”

The programme is relevant to RRI teaching for several distinct reasons. Firstly the programme is
designed to ensure the students receive inputs from various channels. An expert is assigned to each
area the students explore on the city tour that presents specific knowledge to the students along with
input from the communicative channels offered by the space and social environment. Therefore the
students gain new knowledge both from the contents of the lecture and from their direct perception of
place.
The programme also encourages and strengthens the relationship between the university and various
social agents that are part of the tour such as architects, members of different social organisations and
the local community. This allows the students to reflect on how the city evolves through both
architects and urbanists thereby presenting a far more complex reality.
Finally the students are encouraged to develop an interdisciplinary overview of the urbanism and
architecture of Barcelona, which goes beyond the physical limits of the classroom. They are taught to
understand the city built environment, and the physical and social interactions that take place, thereby
introducing them to the social system as well as the physical system of the City of Barcelona. The
66
students perceive the city critical eyes, dynamic explanations and on-site debates in order to discover
the added value of urban environments that usually remain hidden.

The methodology to conduct the project concentrates on three innovative bases in the field of
teaching urbanism. The first method is guided tours around diverse urban areas of Barcelona following
an itinerary that connects a place with knowledge and has its own specific content presented by a local
expert.
The second is the interpretation of urban experiences using graphic reports. During the walking tour
the students utilize all their senses to observe the city, thereby acquiring in situ knowledge and
commence a process of reflection through various graphic techniques. The information acquired on
the walking tour is then transformed by the students into a graphic presentation in the form of
drawings, paintings or images.
The third innovative base is the introduction of ICT systems, which allow debates on the virtual
platforms created as an essential tool for the project. Every participant of Walking the City is
connected through a number of communication channels such as a shared homepage. Through these
channels knowledge is transferred between the participants thereby enriching the knowledge of each
other and enhancing interdisciplinary skills.
Keywords
Social environment, urban experience, critical discussion, sustainability, mobility

X X

X X

X

innovation
X X
67
General info: http://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/88251?locale-attribute=en
Video (in Catalan, Barcelona City Council): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLaG8RUtflg

http://www.bmiaa.com/walking-the-city-a-different-take-on-architecture-and-urban-planning-in-
barcelona/
interview on the radio (in Catalan)

http://cadenaser.com/emisora/2015/04/27/radio_barcelona/1430146535_308512.html
http://eldigital.barcelona.cat/en/discovering-the-relationship-between-architecture-and-the-
city_187357.html
https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/walking_the_city__social_interactio
68
5.22 Database entry: “Recommendation for Promoting Research Integrity”
Recommendation for Promoting Research Integrity
Brief description
This policy document developed by the Irish Council for Bioethics in 2010 represents a summary of
important decisions and suggestions about research integrity, supported by real world examples. The
document describes several areas of research integrity, beginning with the description of research
integrity concept, and then proceeding to list the core values emphasised by research integrity. Two
approaches for greater integrity are described: promotional (educational) and deterrent, and these
approaches can be applied differently in specific research fields. Also, several recommendations about
the research integrity education are listed, such as proposal to start developing research integrity in
younger students in a course format which has to be brief. Additionally, the authors list several
necessary abilities which can be defined as outcomes of research integrity education.

This policy document represents a pathway for course development. It gives specific instructions on
how to design and conduct research integrity education through one or more courses. It represents a
very important document in RRI domain, however, it is mainly a tool for teachers, and can possibly
serve as a textbook for students when learning about research integrity. The following outcomes are
recommended by Irish Council for Bioethics: ethical reasoning, ethical sensitivity, moral motivation and
commitment and survival skills. These outcomes can be applied to all fields of science, especially those
which emphasise social aspect in their research. It is recommended that students work in small groups
rather than have big lectures where the activity of the students can be restricted. Finally, courses can
be adapted to different formats (lectures, workshops or e-learning).

This tool contains general information on research integrity. The recommendations are supported by
real-life examples. However, if the recommendations are applied, the learning results can be very
diverse. The suggestions noted in the document are very flexible and can be applied as problem-based
learning, as well as inquiry-based learning and as lectures. If the designed courses are short, e.g.
workshops, it would be better to apply inquiry-based learning approach, while in full semester courses
it is advised to start with more theoretical basis and then present students with real life cases and/or
problem based learning. The application flexibility is the most important characteristics of this
document. Also, with the flexible teaching format individuals from different scientific fields can easily
69
the best format for knowledge exchange.
Keywords
Research integrity/recommendations/learning/ethics/Irish Council

X X X

X X X X

X X

innovation
X X X X
http://health.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Recommendations_for_Promoting1.pdf
70
5.23 Database entry: “Harvesting Results Preparing for the Future (Mobile Educational DNA Labs)”
Harvesting Results Preparing for the Future (Mobile Educational

DNA Labs)
Brief description
This report written by the Centre for Society and Life Science in 2013 begins with a brief description of
genomic science development from its origins until today. The description is focused on ELSI (Ethical,
Legal and Social Implications) and ELSA (Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects) programmes which are
funded by numerous international agencies. It is estimated that the 5% percent of the total project
budget is spent on ELSA/ELSI and that this percentage is increasing over time. Furthermore, the
description of the aims of the Centre for Society and Genomics reveals that they have incorporated RRI
aspects in their definition, development and implementation. The authors also give an explicit
definition of RRI and different RRI aspects in general. All statements are supported by exemplary cases
in the field of genomics. One of the results of the programme (applied mostly in elementary schools in
Netherlands) were mobile DNA labs, designed especially for educational purposes, where scientists
communicate with students about the field of genomic science.

This case is a very good example of a solution for interesting interactions with the lay public. It is an
example of merging multiple interdisciplinary objectives and using both genomic knowledge and RRI to
stimulate public engagement in both fields. It is possible to use the mobile DNA labs and/or DNA
website as an example in lectures or workshops when starting a new student project, and it is also
possible to create different mobile labs focusing on different fields like chemistry or biology in order to
bring modern science closer to the public. This example could give students a nudge to learn in more
divergent manner. RRI aspects that are taught are primary science literacy through education in
genomic science and public engagement where scientists and lay people have a chance to interact and
learn from each other. This can lead to interdisciplinary knowledge, critical knowledge and training in
problem solving.

Use of real life cases where students have to recognize RRI elements applied in real life. As an example,
it could be used as a part of a lecture in science literacy and/or public engagement classes, allowing
students to give their own opinions about the quality and relevance of the examples. Furthermore, by
using real life cases, one could emphasize where common mistakes are made and where research can
71
be improved. It could also be used as a scenario in inquiry-based learning when describing the process
of science literacy improvement among lay people. However, because the document describes a
project which is implemented in a very specific field, its use in RRI teaching and learning may be limited
and the quality of learning outcomes might be questionable. We advise exploring other examples
which will address a wider range of different scientific fields, allowing different stakeholders to
perceive the use of science in everyday life.
Keywords
Ethics/interdisciplinary/DNA/public/innovation

X X X X (secondary school, MOOC)

X X X X

X

innovation
X X X X
http://www.society-lifesciences.nl/
72
6. Appendix A: Template for case description
Template for HEIRRI database entries
[For each of the 27 selected cases/examples/practices identified as relevant to HEIRRI, a separate template should be filled.
Note that these selected entries have all been partially described during the preparatory work in the review process. Partial
descriptions can be accessed in the XL file enclosed with the email. In order to arrive at fairly homogeneous entries (in terms
of format), please aim to come close to the suggested word-target for each question below.]
Title/name of entry
[Note the name of the case/example/practice]
Brief description
[Please describe the case/example/practice in concrete terms. What is it about; how is it organised? Target: 150 words]

[Why is this case/example/practice relevant for RRI teaching and learning; which kind of learning outcomes are present? E.g.
interdisciplinary objectives, critical thinking, reflexivity etc. Target: 200 words]

[How can this case/example/practice be characterised in terms of its pedagogical aspects? E.g. PBL / IBL / PL, use of real-
life cases etc. Target: 200 words]
Keywords
[Please note five keywords which you think capture this case/example/practice]

[To which of the following degree levels in HE is case/example/practice relevant; several may apply]
[e.g. MOOC, life-long learning etc.]

[Please check those keys, if any, which are specifically being addressed in this case/example/practice; several/all may apply]

[Please try to characterise this case/example/practice by checking one cell in the scheme below]

73
[For which of the following scientific areas is the case/example/practice relevant; several/all may apply]
innovation

[Please provide sources, links, and/or further information on this case/example/practice

Database StockTaking Inventorying Heirri wp2 d2.3 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Database StockTaking Inventorying Heirri wp2 d2.3 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Database StockTaking Inventorying Heirri wp2 d2.3 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

PROJECT DETAILS Project acronym Project title

Funding scheme Thematic priority

Starting date Project coordinator

DELIVERABLE DETAILS Work package ID Expected date

Work package title Deliverable ID and title

Work package leader Deliverable description

Nature Responsible for deliverable

Submission date Dissemination level

0. About HEIRRI .......................................................................................................................................... 5

with the HEIRRI consortium

2. State of the Art Review

2.1 Review methodology

Figure 1: Components of the review methodology

Interviews with Consultation of HEIRRI

2.2 Main messages from review

The review emphasized the relevance of problem-based or inquiry-based learning methodologies in

Table 1: Overview of the 23 cases compiled in the HEIRRI Database

exchange and debate about implementing RRI in curricula across Europe.

TRREE proposes to achieve this goal primarily by developing a training

Development; backcasting and to contribute to the development of scientific work csd.eng.cam.ac.uk/proceedings

5.1 Database entry: “FOSTER”

RRI teaching and learning relevance

Teaching format / pedagogical characteristics

As described by the project, training programmes include: e-learning, b-learning (blended-learning),

Relevant degree levels

Relation to ‘RRI Keys’

Relation to ‘RRI Tools’ classification

Target audience / participants

Sources, links, further readings

Training portal: https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/

5.2 Database entry: “IRRESISTIBLE”

RRI teaching and learning relevance

Teaching format / pedagogical characteristics

Relevant degree levels

Relation to ‘RRI Keys’

Relation to ‘RRI Tools’ classification

Target audience / participants

Sources, links, further readings

5.3 Database entry: “PACITA”

RRI teaching and learning relevance

Teaching format / pedagogical characteristics

Relevant degree levels

Relation to ‘RRI Keys’

Relation to ‘RRI Tools’ classification

Target audience / participants

Sources, links, further readings

5.4 Database entry: “ENRRICH”

RRI teaching and learning relevance

Teaching format / pedagogical characteristics

Relevant degree levels

Relation to ‘RRI Keys’

Relation to ‘RRI Tools’ classification

Target audience / participants

Sources, links, further readings

5.5 Database entry: “PARRISE”

RRI teaching and learning relevance

Teaching format / pedagogical characteristics