Special Section–Focus on Ethics Integrating Responsible Conduct of Research Education into Undergraduate Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Laboratory Curricula
Tamara L. Hendrickson*
From the Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202
Abstract Recently, a requirement for directed responsible conduct in research (RCR) education has become a priority in the United States and elsewhere. In the US, both the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation require RCR education for all students who are financially supported by federal awards. The guidelines produced by these agencies offer useful templates for the introduction of RCR materials into courses worldwide. Many academic programs already offer courses or workshops in RCR for their graduate students and for undergraduate science majors and/or researchers. Introducing RCR into undergraduate biochemistry and molecular biology laboratory curricula is
another, highly practical way that students can be exposed to these important topics. In fact, a strong argument can be made for integrating RCR into laboratory courses because these classes often introduce students to a scientific environment like that they might encounter in their careers after graduation. This article focuses on general strategies for incorporating explicit RCR education into biochemistry and molecular biology laboratory coursework using the topics C suggested by NIH as a starting point. V 2015 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 43(2):68–75, 2015.
Keywords: ethics education; ethics in science and scientific research; laboratory exercises
Introduction While responsible conduct is a fundamental tenet of scientific research, it has long been neglected as an explicit topic in science education, especially at the undergraduate level. Until recently, most students in the sciences often received little or no organized, targeted education in scientific ethics. The assumption was that a moral code of behavior was acquired from mentors and as an implicit, and often tangential, part of research training. It is assumed that scientists at all career stages will act responsibly and morally, dispassionately interpreting their data, while working for the public good. Yet, the definition of responsible conduct can be vague, vary from case to case and from person to person, and be highly impacted by
Abbreviations: COI, Conflicts of interest; NIH, National Institutes of Health; NSF, National Science Foundation; PTC, phenylthiocarbamide; RCR, responsible conduct of research *Address for correspondence to: Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202. E-mail: tamara.hendrickson@ chem.wayne.edu. Received 19 December 2014; Accepted 16 January 2015 DOI 10.1002/bmb.20857 Published online 25 February 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com)
68
one’s personal and cultural backgrounds. Furthermore, highprofile examples of scientific misconduct are found throughout the history of science [1], betraying the public trust and undermining the scientific industry. These negative cases undermine public perception of scientific research and hurt the global scientific community and industry. In response to these issues in the United States, major funding agencies including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) have instituted requirements for formal responsible conduct of research (RCR) education for all researchers who are financially supported by awards from these agencies [2, 3]. In response to these policies, formal RCR education is becoming more prevalent at colleges and universities. However, teaching RCR in laboratory classes is more likely to be neglected, informal or intermittent. Consequently, the purpose of this article is three-fold: first, to introduce unfamiliar readers to the federal requirements in the US; second, to suggest that laboratory classes offer an ideal framework for RCR education; and then third, to provide some concrete suggestions for when and how RCR education can be readily integrated into biochemistry and molecular biology laboratory coursework. This article will focus on the recommendations developed by NIH because these are the most relevant to biochemistry and molecular biology
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
programs. However, most of these guidelines are very general and are consequently applicable to RCR education worldwide. It is important to note that there are innumerable resources available for RCR education outside of these specific disciplines. A good general resource, called On Being A Scientist, is published by the National Academies.[4]
What is RCR? The NIH provides the following definition for RCR: “. . .responsible conduct of research is defined as the practice of scientific investigation with integrity. It involves the awareness and application of established professional norms and ethical principles in the performance of all activities related to scientific research.”[2] This definition provides a useful starting point. By necessity, it is also general enough that it opens the doorway for disagreements and misinterpretations. Most notably, differences in culture, religion, or socioeconomic status, among others, can contribute to an individual’s ethical principles and, consequently, to how each individual may respond to a given moral dilemma. For example, a person’s interpretation of what constitutes plagiarism can vary greatly depending on where (globally) a student received his or her secondary school and college education because ideas about what constitutes original work and when it should be cited can differ. Consequently, one key aspect of RCR education is to acknowledge these possible cultural differences while providing students the knowledge and resources to understand standard professional norms in the country in which they are currently studying. In addition, many instances of alleged academic misconduct are not black and white. For example, it can often be difficult to determine whether or not someone acted with a willful intent to deceive. We all make mistakes, even scholarly ones. Early RCR education can teach young scientists how to be mindful about their interactions with others, their work, and the impact that their actions can have on their own careers and on society as a whole. We all benefit by learning to consciously think about responsible conduct, ethics, and professional norms throughout each stage of our educations and our career development. RCR education in undergraduate curricula gets students started on this path at the right time, when their careers are still wide open in front of them. And, this education can help them establish positive lifelong habits as researchers.
The RCR Topics Recommended by NIH
Hendrickson
interest—personal,
professional,
Importantly, while these guidelines were prepared by a federal funding agency in the US, the core principles are international. With only a few modifications, many of these topics can be readily introduced into undergraduate laboratory curricula in biochemistry and molecular biology. In fact, several of these topics are of such importance that they are probably already discussed to differing extents during the first class of each term. Many are also closely intertwined. Mechanisms for fitting each of these individual topics into laboratory curricula will be discussed in detail later in this article. As you will see throughout these examples, many of these topics already naturally fall into laboratory courses and are almost certainly being addressed informally. Now is the time to begin to more formally introduce these topics so that students perceive and appreciate the importance of thinking about them throughout their educations.
Common RCR Terms Some ethical terms commonly come up when discussing RCR topics. A few of the most important ones are provided here and may be useful.
Intent to Deceive Central to the idea of research misconduct and really any negative behavior is whether or not the accused intended to deceive. We all make mistakes, and so it is important to determine someone’s motives as part of any investigation into misconduct. Was the accused conscious and willful when he or she worked against a professional standard or ? was it carelessness, sloppiness or naivete
Misconduct
The National Institutes of Health have assembled a general list of topics that they recommend for RCR education:[2] 1. Conflict of financial.
2. Policies regarding human subjects, live vertebrate animal subjects in research, and safe laboratory practices. 3. Mentor/mentee responsibilities and relationships. 4. Collaborative research including collaborations with industry. 5. Peer review. 6. Data acquisition and laboratory tools; management, sharing and ownership. 7. Research misconduct and policies for handling misconduct. 8. Responsible authorship and publication. 9. The scientist as a responsible member of society, contemporary ethical issues in biomedical research, and the environmental and societal impacts of scientific research.
and
Misconduct is when someone either willfully or through negligence misrepresents or fabricates results or behaves against the expected ethical and professional norms for a situation. In the context of a laboratory course, examples of misconduct could include consciously omitting data points from a laboratory notebook or laboratory report without
69
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education explanation, changing data to better fit an expected result or conclusion, or withholding information from a laboratory partner. A milder example of misconduct might be arriving unprepared for a laboratory class because a student trusts that his or her laboratory partner will have prepared well enough for both of them.
Stakeholder Stakeholders are the people who are impacted by misconduct of any form. The number of stakeholders can be one (the person behaving inappropriately), or they can be as widespread as all members of a school community (say the reputation of the school is damaged) or even the broader scientific community (say something causes non-scientists to distrust scientists). With respect to a laboratory course, stakeholders would typically include the student’s laboratory partner, and even all members of the class and the professor.
Introducing RCR into Laboratory Curricula is a Natural Fit While it may not be common to incorporate explicit RCR education into laboratory curricula, it is likely that implicit education is already occurring. Topics like recordkeeping (data acquisition and management) and working with a laboratory partner (collaboration) might be discussed on the first day of class and throughout the term. If the course is writing-intensive, then plagiarism (responsible authorship) may be included as a formal topic or, sadly, by necessity after the first laboratory reports have been turned in. Making RCR a more formal component of undergraduate curricula is a logical next step. After all, for students interested in research careers, their undergraduate laboratory courses are often their first glimpses into what day to day scientific research is like. Many traditional experiments in laboratory classes are built from historical research accomplishments. And, in today’s world of guided inquiry, research/inquiry-oriented laboratory classes are becoming more commonplace; [5–7] offering a powerful, direct connection between undergraduate laboratory courses and real-world scientific research. These types of laboratory classes are being developed to expose students to scientific research, enhancing the relevance of their educations, and encouraging them to consider careers in research. RCR education fits naturally into these same goals. Students are already being introduced informally to different RCR topics. Why not take the opportunity to strengthen their education with more formal lectures or, even better, discussions or tangible assignments? Early exposure to RCR topics has the potential to teach these students a professional code of conduct and a level of mindful thinking that will last them a lifetime with long-term impact on their professional career development.
70
A Professional Code of Conduct In the Sound of Music, when trying to teach her new charges how to sing, Maria begins: “Let’s start at the very beginning, a very good place to start” [8]. This philosophy holds true with respect to introducing RCR into laboratory curricula. In fact, most laboratory instructors already begin each term with informal RCR education by discussing topics like laboratory safety, record keeping, and course expectations. A powerful addition to this approach would be to introduce the students to the formal concept of a professional code of conduct. The extent of this code can vary based on the level of the course being taught, the nature of the course, and the experience of the students. The key point is to start the semester off by encouraging students to consciously think beyond what they need to do to pass the class or get the grade they want. Push them to consider the course as a community with professional expectations. As an exercise at the beginning of the term, ask the students to define what they think the criteria for a professional code of conduct in a laboratory class should be. Undergraduate students may not have given much thought to the idea of a formal code of behavior, with the majority of their insights or experience stemming from what types of jobs they have had or the career paths of their parents. Importantly, make sure to connect the idea of a professional code of conduct for a specific laboratory class to longterm career development. In this way, students can see that they are practicing the skills needed to succeed in whatever career path they choose to pursue. In their future careers, these students will almost certainly be held to some sort of professional code (some stricter than others), no matter what their careers. The earlier they start to consciously develop these skills the better. For example, confidentiality is critical to for profit science (e.g., pharmaceutical or biotech companies) so that competing companies don’t learn of and capitalize on trade secrets. Even for entry-level positions, scientists are often asked to sign confidentiality agreements and even non-competing clauses when signing on for a new job. Day-to-day, scientists are expected to act with a high degree of general professionalism, with respect to their colleagues and how they represent their company. Misbehavior can delay promotions and lead to termination, especially in today’s highly competitive job climate. Realistically, why would a company keep an employee on staff who causes trouble when other highly-skilled scientists are eager for the same job? The same professionalism is evident in the careers of most academic scientists as well. However, the penalties for misbehavior are rarely as severe, especially after someone has earned tenure. In academia, inappropriate behavior is more likely to cause indirect consequences (e.g., it may be harder for a poorly trusted scientist to publish). Laboratory courses offer an ideal environment to emphasize the importance of professionalism, encouraging students to develop habits that will serve them well for a lifetime.
Integrating Responsible Conduct
TABLE 1
Some online resources on ethics in science and medicine
Title
Link
On Being A Scientist
www.nap.edu/catalog/12192/on-being-a-scientist-a-guide-toresponsible-conduct-in
Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science
Onlineethics.org
NIH Office for Research Integrity
ori.hhs.gov/
Resources for Research Ethics Education
research-ethics.net/topics/
International Research Integrity
www.nsf.gov/od/iia/ise/intl-research-integrity.jsp
Ethics in Science and Engineering National Clearinghouse
scholarworks.umass.edu/esence/
Code of Ethics (ASBMB)
www.asbmb.org/Page.aspx?id570
Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research
www.primr.org/
This list is not meant to be comprehensive. These links can serve as helpful starting points when looking for case studies or examples to use in a class.
Methods to Integrate RCR into Laboratory Curricula Once the idea of a professional code of conduct is introduced, it can set the framework for RCR discussions throughout the term. Not all of the NIH topics listed above easily transfer into a laboratory setting, although most can be discussed within the context of any established or developing course curriculum. The next sections discuss how different topics might be introduced as part of a course’s introductory material, in discussions throughout the term, or with respect to individual laboratory experiments. Using case studies is a powerful way to introduce students to the consequences of misconduct. This article focuses generally on introducing RCR into courses so that the selection of case studies can be guided to be in line with the course’s curriculum if desired. There are many resources available online with documented case studies. A good place to start is with the On Being a Scientist book produced by the National Academies. [4] Table 1 lists some other useful online resources.
Conflict of Interest—Personal, Professional, and Financial Conflicts of interest (COI) are best introduced into laboratory curricula at the beginning of the term. Students may not realize that even the appearance of a COI can be sufficient to cause ethical concerns. Ask students to define what a COI might be? How might one come up in a laboratory course? For example, personal COIs can arise in one’s choice of a laboratory partner. Should students be allowed to be lab-
Hendrickson
oratory partners with their spouses, boyfriends, girlfriends, friends, or roommates? What might the unforeseen consequences of such a pairing be? Are they all the same? Discussing these possibilities on the first day of class, before laboratory partners are selected, will cause students to think about their choices, how they might be perceived, and how they might avoid misperceptions. The discussion could be followed up by a summary of the instructor’s policies regarding laboratory partners and when it is appropriate to work together versus independently. Professional and financial COIs are less likely to be relevant to formal discussion in a laboratory class. Nevertheless, these topics can come up and it serves our students well if we keep our eyes open for opportunities to discuss these issues.
Policies Regarding Human Subjects, Live Vertebrate Animal Subjects in Research, and Safe Laboratory Practices The opportunity to discuss human or animal subjects in a laboratory course is going to be highly specific to the nature of the class, and many students will go through college without conducting animal experiments. It is also unusual for students to be exposed to research with human subjects in biochemistry and molecular biology curricula. Consequently, discussions of the mechanics of receiving institutional approval to conduct human or animal trials are topics that undergraduate students often do not encounter. However, when appropriate, these topics can be introduced into lecture materials that accompany laboratory curricula.
71
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
Genetic Testing in a Laboratory Class and a Students’ Rights to Privacy One interesting example to consider is the idea of genetic studies in laboratory classes and students’ rights to privacy [9]. For example, a classic experiment gives students samples of phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) to taste. Some students can taste this bitter compound and others can’t; students can then classify themselves as supertasters or not. When the ability to taste PTC was traced to polymorphisms in the TAS2R38 gene, laboratory courses emerged where students could sequence their own TAS2R38 gene to correlate their susceptibility to PTC tasting with a distinct DNA mutation. This experiment allowed students to draw personal connections between phenotype and genotype. However, in recent years, correlations have begun to emerge between TAS2R38 polymorphisms and predispositions to different diseases [10], raising concerns about these types of laboratory studies because they are tantamount to genetic testing and personalized medicine without counseling and with concerns for students’ rights to privacy. Even if your course doesn’t conduct a laboratory based on PTC tasting, students in a genetics or molecular biology laboratory class could be asked to discuss this situation in a class assignment or as part of a laboratory report. They could be encouraged to consider their rights to privacy, the impact of obtaining personal genetic information without concomitant counseling, and how they might feel if they found out that they had one of the deleterious TAS2R38 mutations. In this way, students can be introduced to the ethical dilemmas that arise with human research without actually determining their own PTC tasting phenotype or TAS2R38 genotype.
Animal Rights and Our Responsibilities as Researchers to Animal Welfare Of course, some undergraduate laboratory classes do involve experiments with animals or the use of samples obtained from animals. These experiments offer ideal circumstances to introduce students to the importance of safety (for both the animals and the researchers) and animal welfare. One approach would be to introduce students to the process through which university approval was obtained for that given laboratory experiment. Furthermore, students should be asked to include an experimental section describing how they managed welfare issues throughout the experiment.
Mentor/Mentee Responsibilities and Relationships The complex relationships between mentors and mentees come into play during independent research more than they do in laboratory courses. Nevertheless, instructors are also mentors and role models. Discussions of expectations during the first class meeting and throughout the semester are techniques already used by most educators to define
72
their accessibility and boundaries for their roles as mentors to their students. Within the realm of standard RCR education, students discuss the roles of mentors, typically examining the positive opportunities and career development that can come from having one or more strong mentor, as well as the challenges that can arise when a COI comes up between a mentor and mentee. Neither mentors nor mentees are immune to misconduct. When it is a trusted or influential mentor (say a research advisor) that behaves inappropriately or dishonestly, the student mentee can be put in a very difficult or untenable position. It is critical that RCR education prepare students for the likelihood that these types of conflicts can arise and to provide them with access or at least the awareness of resources that can help them navigate conflicts where they may be the victim of a power differential. However, these topics are difficult, if not impossible, to weave into a biochemistry or molecular biology setting. Instead, departments might consider incorporating this type of discussion into a research orientation program, for example.
Collaborative Research Including Collaborations with Industry It is rare that collaborations with industry will fit into an undergraduate laboratory course. In contrast, collaborative interactions between peers are often essential to modern laboratory courses, just like they are in research laboratories. Students often work with a single laboratory partner throughout the term, work in larger groups for specific experiments, collaborate with respect to data interpretation and workup, and even write laboratory reports in teams. Thus, most faculty already introduce course policies for collaboration at the beginning of the semester, establishing expectations for when it is appropriate to collaborate and when work must be a student’s own. To make this discussion more explicitly relevant to RCR education and to increase each student’s mindfulness of the contributions of others to their work, simple protocols can be put into place that mimic how some journals now require attributions to be assigned (e.g., Nature [11]). These contribution sections have become more common because of past allegations of misconduct and accusations of inappropriate assignment of authors. For laboratory classes, students could be required to include a contributions section in each laboratory report. In this section, they would very briefly discuss how they and their collaborators each individually contributed to a given experiment and to the final report or assignment. Students should always be asked to list their laboratory partner(s) on their laboratory reports. It is important that the students are made aware that this requirement is not to identifying which student works harder or contributes more, but are to help make them more conscious of how they collaborate with others. Consequently, grading shouldn’t be tied to who appears to
Integrating Responsible Conduct
have done the most work (unless large disparities emerge), but rather to the effort that each student puts into preparing the section. As an aside, with respect to listing contributions, disparate answers from laboratory partners can illuminate partnerships where one student is carrying more of the academic burden than the other, especially for work done outside of the laboratory where an instructor cannot see what is going on. Intervention by the instructor, by working more closely with the weaker member of the pair, working directly with both students, or strategically reassigning laboratory partners, can help restore this balance and strengthen everyone’s education and class experience.
Peer Review Peer review is a strategy often used by instructors in writing-intensive classes, including laboratory classes, to help students learn to write more clearly and effectively and it can serve as a powerful educational tool. Students often listen and take constructive criticism from their peers with a different mindset than they do from faculty or advisors. However, students are also often loath to criticize their peers, rendering peer review much less effective. Putting peer review into the context of responsible conduct provides students with the information needed to appreciate how their efforts are meant to be helpful and how they fit into their scientific education. In any class that incorporates peer review (or literature review), students should be introduced to the anonymous peer review processes used for manuscript submissions and grant proposal reviews. It is important that students recognize that peer review is a fundamental part of any career in science and that we all perform peer reviews as a service to our disciplines to insure that the best possible work is funded or published. Emphasis and discussion should focus on what makes a good review (constructive criticism, professional language, clear examples) versus a bad review (vague suggestions, inappropriate language etc.). Students need to appreciate that reciprocation is the key: they should put as much effort into constructively critiquing their peers as they hope to receive themselves. Then, students could be asked to read and critique part or all of a classmate’s laboratory report, before the final version is turned in.
Data Acquisition and Laboratory Tools; Management, Sharing, and Ownership Of course, data acquisition and recordkeeping are important topics that are typically addressed on the first day of class when instructors lay out their expectations for laboratory notebooks. We all know that the importance of proper recordkeeping is fundamental to research and the adequacy of a student’s notebook should be part of their grade for any laboratory class. To put data acquisition into an RCR context, discussions (presumably on the first day of class) should focus on the importance of recordkeeping and
Hendrickson
the consequences of poor data management. With respect to a laboratory course, the consequences can be inaccuracies or missing data that is necessary to complete a laboratory report; or confusion or the appearance of misconduct with respect to the assignment of contributions. Proper data acquisition and recording optimizes a students success in class and can protect their integrity, should the need arise. The importance of management, sharing and ownership of data is going to vary depending on the nature of the course and aspects of the corresponding RCR topics were discussed above in Section 4: Collaborative Research.
Research Misconduct and Policies for Handling Misconduct Research misconduct is arguably the most important topic for an RCR program. For laboratory courses, which are instructional rather than research, the concepts of research misconduct tie closely with those of academic misconduct. Obviously, young scientists need to be prepared for their careers in ways that encourage them to conduct their research endeavors beyond reproach, setting the highest possible standards for themselves. But, they also need to be prepared for the possibility that they might find themselves as unwitting stakeholders in some kind of misconduct or allegations therein (whether founded or unfounded). Empowering young scientists to behave responsibly and to take appropriate action when wrongdoing is observed is fundamentally important for their career development and for the scientific community. However, it can be difficult to integrate discussions of research misconduct into the context of a laboratory course. One approach is simply to make the students aware of the correlations between academic and research misconduct. Instructors typically discuss their expectations for academic honesty and collaboration and they define the consequences of misconduct (e.g., failing the class, receiving a zero grade for an assignment, being turned in to the appropriate university administrative group, etc.). Parallels can be drawn to real-world cases so that students can see that serious consequences can follow them throughout their careers. (There are innumerable resources for case studies online, both real and fictional. For a couple of recent, high-profile examples see Refs. [12, 13].) It can be difficult to have these discussions without discouraging students from careers in science, and so it is important to remind students that the vast majority of scientists are honest, ethical practitioners. There best approach to a rewarding career in the sciences is to hold themselves and their peers to the highest ethical standards. One aspect of RCR that is not always explicitly discussed is the idea of approaching one’s own data analysis from a highly critical position, playing Devil’s Advocate, so to speak. Most instructors naturally encourage their students to critically think about their results and to propose
73
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education explanations for what might have gone wrong when an experiment does not work. In laboratory classes, where the experiments can be very straightforward and/or optimized for success, we do not always ask our students to propose alternative interpretations or additional experiments when discussing their results. Throughout our research education as scientists, we become adept at criticizing our own results, looking for other interpretations that deviate from our favored hypothesis. This approach encourages us to think critically about our own data, eliminating as much personal bias as we can from our analyses. This skill is important for our career development and success and, in the context of RCR, it strengthens our conclusions and enhances the reliability and reproducibility of results, critical components of RCR. Introducing more of this type of self-critical data analysis into laboratory courses is another logical way to encourage students to be more mindful about their data and conclusions.
Responsible Authorship and Publication Methods for introducing authorship and publication issues into undergraduate laboratory courses were discussed in Section 4: Collaborative Research.
The Scientist as a Responsible Member of Society, Contemporary Ethical Issues in Biomedical Research, and the Environmental and Societal Impacts of Scientific Research This final talking point posed by NIH is the most esoteric because it does not address day-to-day issues of RCR. However, it can also be the most engaging when introducing RCR to undergraduates because it ties their educational program to the outside world. The goal behind this topic is to instill in scientists the importance of maintaining useful, open dialog with non-scientists about modern research accomplishments and the impact that they may have on society. The challenge is that scientists are often most comfortable talking about their own work to their scientific peers. Scientific research is driven by curiosity and goals for the betterment of society and yet most members of society have only casual levels of understanding about what scientists do and how current scientific research might benefit them in the future. The diversity of modern scientific research topics important to scientists and to society is innumerable and highly topical (e.g., stem cell research, antibiotic resistance, climate change, renewable energy, personalized medicine and the human genome etc.). By more enthusiastically and effectively engaging nonscientists into discussions about the importance of these topics, the public trust in the scientific endeavor can be upheld, with benefits that could readily extend into areas like politics, increased federal support for research, stronger scientific education programs, and greater recruitment of talent into scientific fields. Encouraging undergraduates to participate in their communities as scientists is a logical
74
first step to establish a lifetime pattern of outreach and engagement. While the importance of this topic is evident, mechanisms to encourage undergraduate students in a laboratory course to engage with their peers are less obvious and are going to be best tailored to a given course or experiment. One approach, when introducing a new experiment, would be to have class discussions go beyond the techniques to be learned and the expected results to include the importance of the work to society. For many biochemistry and molecular biology experiments, this type of discussion can examine the medical gains that were made from the techniques or macromolecules being studied in a given laboratory. For example, for an experiment on protein purification, discussions could include examples of proteins that are used therapeutically; DNA can touch on personalized medicine or genetic diseases, etc. Finally, and most in line with this RCR topic, students could be tasked to discuss the impact of their laboratory experiments with their peers, particularly with those who aren’t scientists, and to include a summary of this discussion in their laboratory reports. An exercise like this one will also encourage students to gain important skills with respect to presenting science to their non-scientific peers.
Conclusions Explicit RCR education is an important tool to instill a powerful professional code of conduct into young scientists. Laboratory courses in biochemistry and molecular biology are a perfect environment to introduce many of these topics because they introduce students to laboratory settings. With forethought, some planning and a little bit of creativity, these topics can be readily integrated into laboratory curricula. It is our responsibility to instill a strong sense of mindful, ethical thinking in our students to help them prepare for the challenges they may face in their future careers and for the benefit of science and society.
References [1] Goodstein, D. (2010) On Fact and Fraud: Cautionary Tales from the Front Lines of Science, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. [2] National Institutes of Health. NOT-OD-10–019: Update on the Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. Available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10– 019.html. Accessed on January 30, 2015. [3] National Science Foundation. Responsible Conduct of Research. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rcr.jsp Accessed on October 24, 2014). [4] Committee on Science, E. and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. (2009) On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research, 3rd ed., Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Integrating Responsible Conduct
[5] Howard, D. R. and Miskowski, J. A. (2005) Using a module-based laboratory to incorporate inquiry into a large cell biology course. Cell Biol Educ 4, 249–260. [6] Hall, M. L. and Vardar-Ulu, D. (2014) An inquiry-based biochemistry laboratory structure emphasizing competency in the scientific process: A guided approach with an electronic notebook format. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 42, 58–67. [7] Spiro, M. D. and Knisely, K. I. (2008) Alternation of generations and experimental design: A guided-inquiry lab exploring the nature of the her1 developmental mutant of Ceratopteris richardii (C-Fern). CBE Life Sci Educ 7, 82–88. [8] Wise, R. (1965) The Sound of Music.
Hendrickson
[9] Weinlander, K. M. and Hall, D. J. (2010) Designing laboratory exercises for the undergraduate molecular biology/biochemistry student: Techniques and ethical implications involved in personalized medicine. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 38, 180–187. [10] Lee, R. J. and Cohen, N. A. (2015) Role of the bitter taste receptor T2R38 in upper respiratory infection and chronic rhinosinusitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 15, 14–20. [11] Nature Journals. Nature journals’ authorship policy. Available at: http:// www.nature.com/authors/policies/authorship.html. Accessed on January 30, 2015. [12] Hayden, E. C. (2008) Chemistry: Designer debacle. Nature 453, 275–278. [13] Couzin, J. (2008) Truth and consequences. Science 313, 1222–1226.
75
Tamara L. Hendrickson*
From the Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202
Abstract Recently, a requirement for directed responsible conduct in research (RCR) education has become a priority in the United States and elsewhere. In the US, both the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation require RCR education for all students who are financially supported by federal awards. The guidelines produced by these agencies offer useful templates for the introduction of RCR materials into courses worldwide. Many academic programs already offer courses or workshops in RCR for their graduate students and for undergraduate science majors and/or researchers. Introducing RCR into undergraduate biochemistry and molecular biology laboratory curricula is
another, highly practical way that students can be exposed to these important topics. In fact, a strong argument can be made for integrating RCR into laboratory courses because these classes often introduce students to a scientific environment like that they might encounter in their careers after graduation. This article focuses on general strategies for incorporating explicit RCR education into biochemistry and molecular biology laboratory coursework using the topics C suggested by NIH as a starting point. V 2015 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 43(2):68–75, 2015.
Keywords: ethics education; ethics in science and scientific research; laboratory exercises
Introduction While responsible conduct is a fundamental tenet of scientific research, it has long been neglected as an explicit topic in science education, especially at the undergraduate level. Until recently, most students in the sciences often received little or no organized, targeted education in scientific ethics. The assumption was that a moral code of behavior was acquired from mentors and as an implicit, and often tangential, part of research training. It is assumed that scientists at all career stages will act responsibly and morally, dispassionately interpreting their data, while working for the public good. Yet, the definition of responsible conduct can be vague, vary from case to case and from person to person, and be highly impacted by
Abbreviations: COI, Conflicts of interest; NIH, National Institutes of Health; NSF, National Science Foundation; PTC, phenylthiocarbamide; RCR, responsible conduct of research *Address for correspondence to: Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202. E-mail: tamara.hendrickson@ chem.wayne.edu. Received 19 December 2014; Accepted 16 January 2015 DOI 10.1002/bmb.20857 Published online 25 February 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com)
68
one’s personal and cultural backgrounds. Furthermore, highprofile examples of scientific misconduct are found throughout the history of science [1], betraying the public trust and undermining the scientific industry. These negative cases undermine public perception of scientific research and hurt the global scientific community and industry. In response to these issues in the United States, major funding agencies including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) have instituted requirements for formal responsible conduct of research (RCR) education for all researchers who are financially supported by awards from these agencies [2, 3]. In response to these policies, formal RCR education is becoming more prevalent at colleges and universities. However, teaching RCR in laboratory classes is more likely to be neglected, informal or intermittent. Consequently, the purpose of this article is three-fold: first, to introduce unfamiliar readers to the federal requirements in the US; second, to suggest that laboratory classes offer an ideal framework for RCR education; and then third, to provide some concrete suggestions for when and how RCR education can be readily integrated into biochemistry and molecular biology laboratory coursework. This article will focus on the recommendations developed by NIH because these are the most relevant to biochemistry and molecular biology
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
programs. However, most of these guidelines are very general and are consequently applicable to RCR education worldwide. It is important to note that there are innumerable resources available for RCR education outside of these specific disciplines. A good general resource, called On Being A Scientist, is published by the National Academies.[4]
What is RCR? The NIH provides the following definition for RCR: “. . .responsible conduct of research is defined as the practice of scientific investigation with integrity. It involves the awareness and application of established professional norms and ethical principles in the performance of all activities related to scientific research.”[2] This definition provides a useful starting point. By necessity, it is also general enough that it opens the doorway for disagreements and misinterpretations. Most notably, differences in culture, religion, or socioeconomic status, among others, can contribute to an individual’s ethical principles and, consequently, to how each individual may respond to a given moral dilemma. For example, a person’s interpretation of what constitutes plagiarism can vary greatly depending on where (globally) a student received his or her secondary school and college education because ideas about what constitutes original work and when it should be cited can differ. Consequently, one key aspect of RCR education is to acknowledge these possible cultural differences while providing students the knowledge and resources to understand standard professional norms in the country in which they are currently studying. In addition, many instances of alleged academic misconduct are not black and white. For example, it can often be difficult to determine whether or not someone acted with a willful intent to deceive. We all make mistakes, even scholarly ones. Early RCR education can teach young scientists how to be mindful about their interactions with others, their work, and the impact that their actions can have on their own careers and on society as a whole. We all benefit by learning to consciously think about responsible conduct, ethics, and professional norms throughout each stage of our educations and our career development. RCR education in undergraduate curricula gets students started on this path at the right time, when their careers are still wide open in front of them. And, this education can help them establish positive lifelong habits as researchers.
The RCR Topics Recommended by NIH
Hendrickson
interest—personal,
professional,
Importantly, while these guidelines were prepared by a federal funding agency in the US, the core principles are international. With only a few modifications, many of these topics can be readily introduced into undergraduate laboratory curricula in biochemistry and molecular biology. In fact, several of these topics are of such importance that they are probably already discussed to differing extents during the first class of each term. Many are also closely intertwined. Mechanisms for fitting each of these individual topics into laboratory curricula will be discussed in detail later in this article. As you will see throughout these examples, many of these topics already naturally fall into laboratory courses and are almost certainly being addressed informally. Now is the time to begin to more formally introduce these topics so that students perceive and appreciate the importance of thinking about them throughout their educations.
Common RCR Terms Some ethical terms commonly come up when discussing RCR topics. A few of the most important ones are provided here and may be useful.
Intent to Deceive Central to the idea of research misconduct and really any negative behavior is whether or not the accused intended to deceive. We all make mistakes, and so it is important to determine someone’s motives as part of any investigation into misconduct. Was the accused conscious and willful when he or she worked against a professional standard or ? was it carelessness, sloppiness or naivete
Misconduct
The National Institutes of Health have assembled a general list of topics that they recommend for RCR education:[2] 1. Conflict of financial.
2. Policies regarding human subjects, live vertebrate animal subjects in research, and safe laboratory practices. 3. Mentor/mentee responsibilities and relationships. 4. Collaborative research including collaborations with industry. 5. Peer review. 6. Data acquisition and laboratory tools; management, sharing and ownership. 7. Research misconduct and policies for handling misconduct. 8. Responsible authorship and publication. 9. The scientist as a responsible member of society, contemporary ethical issues in biomedical research, and the environmental and societal impacts of scientific research.
and
Misconduct is when someone either willfully or through negligence misrepresents or fabricates results or behaves against the expected ethical and professional norms for a situation. In the context of a laboratory course, examples of misconduct could include consciously omitting data points from a laboratory notebook or laboratory report without
69
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education explanation, changing data to better fit an expected result or conclusion, or withholding information from a laboratory partner. A milder example of misconduct might be arriving unprepared for a laboratory class because a student trusts that his or her laboratory partner will have prepared well enough for both of them.
Stakeholder Stakeholders are the people who are impacted by misconduct of any form. The number of stakeholders can be one (the person behaving inappropriately), or they can be as widespread as all members of a school community (say the reputation of the school is damaged) or even the broader scientific community (say something causes non-scientists to distrust scientists). With respect to a laboratory course, stakeholders would typically include the student’s laboratory partner, and even all members of the class and the professor.
Introducing RCR into Laboratory Curricula is a Natural Fit While it may not be common to incorporate explicit RCR education into laboratory curricula, it is likely that implicit education is already occurring. Topics like recordkeeping (data acquisition and management) and working with a laboratory partner (collaboration) might be discussed on the first day of class and throughout the term. If the course is writing-intensive, then plagiarism (responsible authorship) may be included as a formal topic or, sadly, by necessity after the first laboratory reports have been turned in. Making RCR a more formal component of undergraduate curricula is a logical next step. After all, for students interested in research careers, their undergraduate laboratory courses are often their first glimpses into what day to day scientific research is like. Many traditional experiments in laboratory classes are built from historical research accomplishments. And, in today’s world of guided inquiry, research/inquiry-oriented laboratory classes are becoming more commonplace; [5–7] offering a powerful, direct connection between undergraduate laboratory courses and real-world scientific research. These types of laboratory classes are being developed to expose students to scientific research, enhancing the relevance of their educations, and encouraging them to consider careers in research. RCR education fits naturally into these same goals. Students are already being introduced informally to different RCR topics. Why not take the opportunity to strengthen their education with more formal lectures or, even better, discussions or tangible assignments? Early exposure to RCR topics has the potential to teach these students a professional code of conduct and a level of mindful thinking that will last them a lifetime with long-term impact on their professional career development.
70
A Professional Code of Conduct In the Sound of Music, when trying to teach her new charges how to sing, Maria begins: “Let’s start at the very beginning, a very good place to start” [8]. This philosophy holds true with respect to introducing RCR into laboratory curricula. In fact, most laboratory instructors already begin each term with informal RCR education by discussing topics like laboratory safety, record keeping, and course expectations. A powerful addition to this approach would be to introduce the students to the formal concept of a professional code of conduct. The extent of this code can vary based on the level of the course being taught, the nature of the course, and the experience of the students. The key point is to start the semester off by encouraging students to consciously think beyond what they need to do to pass the class or get the grade they want. Push them to consider the course as a community with professional expectations. As an exercise at the beginning of the term, ask the students to define what they think the criteria for a professional code of conduct in a laboratory class should be. Undergraduate students may not have given much thought to the idea of a formal code of behavior, with the majority of their insights or experience stemming from what types of jobs they have had or the career paths of their parents. Importantly, make sure to connect the idea of a professional code of conduct for a specific laboratory class to longterm career development. In this way, students can see that they are practicing the skills needed to succeed in whatever career path they choose to pursue. In their future careers, these students will almost certainly be held to some sort of professional code (some stricter than others), no matter what their careers. The earlier they start to consciously develop these skills the better. For example, confidentiality is critical to for profit science (e.g., pharmaceutical or biotech companies) so that competing companies don’t learn of and capitalize on trade secrets. Even for entry-level positions, scientists are often asked to sign confidentiality agreements and even non-competing clauses when signing on for a new job. Day-to-day, scientists are expected to act with a high degree of general professionalism, with respect to their colleagues and how they represent their company. Misbehavior can delay promotions and lead to termination, especially in today’s highly competitive job climate. Realistically, why would a company keep an employee on staff who causes trouble when other highly-skilled scientists are eager for the same job? The same professionalism is evident in the careers of most academic scientists as well. However, the penalties for misbehavior are rarely as severe, especially after someone has earned tenure. In academia, inappropriate behavior is more likely to cause indirect consequences (e.g., it may be harder for a poorly trusted scientist to publish). Laboratory courses offer an ideal environment to emphasize the importance of professionalism, encouraging students to develop habits that will serve them well for a lifetime.
Integrating Responsible Conduct
TABLE 1
Some online resources on ethics in science and medicine
Title
Link
On Being A Scientist
www.nap.edu/catalog/12192/on-being-a-scientist-a-guide-toresponsible-conduct-in
Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science
Onlineethics.org
NIH Office for Research Integrity
ori.hhs.gov/
Resources for Research Ethics Education
research-ethics.net/topics/
International Research Integrity
www.nsf.gov/od/iia/ise/intl-research-integrity.jsp
Ethics in Science and Engineering National Clearinghouse
scholarworks.umass.edu/esence/
Code of Ethics (ASBMB)
www.asbmb.org/Page.aspx?id570
Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research
www.primr.org/
This list is not meant to be comprehensive. These links can serve as helpful starting points when looking for case studies or examples to use in a class.
Methods to Integrate RCR into Laboratory Curricula Once the idea of a professional code of conduct is introduced, it can set the framework for RCR discussions throughout the term. Not all of the NIH topics listed above easily transfer into a laboratory setting, although most can be discussed within the context of any established or developing course curriculum. The next sections discuss how different topics might be introduced as part of a course’s introductory material, in discussions throughout the term, or with respect to individual laboratory experiments. Using case studies is a powerful way to introduce students to the consequences of misconduct. This article focuses generally on introducing RCR into courses so that the selection of case studies can be guided to be in line with the course’s curriculum if desired. There are many resources available online with documented case studies. A good place to start is with the On Being a Scientist book produced by the National Academies. [4] Table 1 lists some other useful online resources.
Conflict of Interest—Personal, Professional, and Financial Conflicts of interest (COI) are best introduced into laboratory curricula at the beginning of the term. Students may not realize that even the appearance of a COI can be sufficient to cause ethical concerns. Ask students to define what a COI might be? How might one come up in a laboratory course? For example, personal COIs can arise in one’s choice of a laboratory partner. Should students be allowed to be lab-
Hendrickson
oratory partners with their spouses, boyfriends, girlfriends, friends, or roommates? What might the unforeseen consequences of such a pairing be? Are they all the same? Discussing these possibilities on the first day of class, before laboratory partners are selected, will cause students to think about their choices, how they might be perceived, and how they might avoid misperceptions. The discussion could be followed up by a summary of the instructor’s policies regarding laboratory partners and when it is appropriate to work together versus independently. Professional and financial COIs are less likely to be relevant to formal discussion in a laboratory class. Nevertheless, these topics can come up and it serves our students well if we keep our eyes open for opportunities to discuss these issues.
Policies Regarding Human Subjects, Live Vertebrate Animal Subjects in Research, and Safe Laboratory Practices The opportunity to discuss human or animal subjects in a laboratory course is going to be highly specific to the nature of the class, and many students will go through college without conducting animal experiments. It is also unusual for students to be exposed to research with human subjects in biochemistry and molecular biology curricula. Consequently, discussions of the mechanics of receiving institutional approval to conduct human or animal trials are topics that undergraduate students often do not encounter. However, when appropriate, these topics can be introduced into lecture materials that accompany laboratory curricula.
71
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
Genetic Testing in a Laboratory Class and a Students’ Rights to Privacy One interesting example to consider is the idea of genetic studies in laboratory classes and students’ rights to privacy [9]. For example, a classic experiment gives students samples of phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) to taste. Some students can taste this bitter compound and others can’t; students can then classify themselves as supertasters or not. When the ability to taste PTC was traced to polymorphisms in the TAS2R38 gene, laboratory courses emerged where students could sequence their own TAS2R38 gene to correlate their susceptibility to PTC tasting with a distinct DNA mutation. This experiment allowed students to draw personal connections between phenotype and genotype. However, in recent years, correlations have begun to emerge between TAS2R38 polymorphisms and predispositions to different diseases [10], raising concerns about these types of laboratory studies because they are tantamount to genetic testing and personalized medicine without counseling and with concerns for students’ rights to privacy. Even if your course doesn’t conduct a laboratory based on PTC tasting, students in a genetics or molecular biology laboratory class could be asked to discuss this situation in a class assignment or as part of a laboratory report. They could be encouraged to consider their rights to privacy, the impact of obtaining personal genetic information without concomitant counseling, and how they might feel if they found out that they had one of the deleterious TAS2R38 mutations. In this way, students can be introduced to the ethical dilemmas that arise with human research without actually determining their own PTC tasting phenotype or TAS2R38 genotype.
Animal Rights and Our Responsibilities as Researchers to Animal Welfare Of course, some undergraduate laboratory classes do involve experiments with animals or the use of samples obtained from animals. These experiments offer ideal circumstances to introduce students to the importance of safety (for both the animals and the researchers) and animal welfare. One approach would be to introduce students to the process through which university approval was obtained for that given laboratory experiment. Furthermore, students should be asked to include an experimental section describing how they managed welfare issues throughout the experiment.
Mentor/Mentee Responsibilities and Relationships The complex relationships between mentors and mentees come into play during independent research more than they do in laboratory courses. Nevertheless, instructors are also mentors and role models. Discussions of expectations during the first class meeting and throughout the semester are techniques already used by most educators to define
72
their accessibility and boundaries for their roles as mentors to their students. Within the realm of standard RCR education, students discuss the roles of mentors, typically examining the positive opportunities and career development that can come from having one or more strong mentor, as well as the challenges that can arise when a COI comes up between a mentor and mentee. Neither mentors nor mentees are immune to misconduct. When it is a trusted or influential mentor (say a research advisor) that behaves inappropriately or dishonestly, the student mentee can be put in a very difficult or untenable position. It is critical that RCR education prepare students for the likelihood that these types of conflicts can arise and to provide them with access or at least the awareness of resources that can help them navigate conflicts where they may be the victim of a power differential. However, these topics are difficult, if not impossible, to weave into a biochemistry or molecular biology setting. Instead, departments might consider incorporating this type of discussion into a research orientation program, for example.
Collaborative Research Including Collaborations with Industry It is rare that collaborations with industry will fit into an undergraduate laboratory course. In contrast, collaborative interactions between peers are often essential to modern laboratory courses, just like they are in research laboratories. Students often work with a single laboratory partner throughout the term, work in larger groups for specific experiments, collaborate with respect to data interpretation and workup, and even write laboratory reports in teams. Thus, most faculty already introduce course policies for collaboration at the beginning of the semester, establishing expectations for when it is appropriate to collaborate and when work must be a student’s own. To make this discussion more explicitly relevant to RCR education and to increase each student’s mindfulness of the contributions of others to their work, simple protocols can be put into place that mimic how some journals now require attributions to be assigned (e.g., Nature [11]). These contribution sections have become more common because of past allegations of misconduct and accusations of inappropriate assignment of authors. For laboratory classes, students could be required to include a contributions section in each laboratory report. In this section, they would very briefly discuss how they and their collaborators each individually contributed to a given experiment and to the final report or assignment. Students should always be asked to list their laboratory partner(s) on their laboratory reports. It is important that the students are made aware that this requirement is not to identifying which student works harder or contributes more, but are to help make them more conscious of how they collaborate with others. Consequently, grading shouldn’t be tied to who appears to
Integrating Responsible Conduct
have done the most work (unless large disparities emerge), but rather to the effort that each student puts into preparing the section. As an aside, with respect to listing contributions, disparate answers from laboratory partners can illuminate partnerships where one student is carrying more of the academic burden than the other, especially for work done outside of the laboratory where an instructor cannot see what is going on. Intervention by the instructor, by working more closely with the weaker member of the pair, working directly with both students, or strategically reassigning laboratory partners, can help restore this balance and strengthen everyone’s education and class experience.
Peer Review Peer review is a strategy often used by instructors in writing-intensive classes, including laboratory classes, to help students learn to write more clearly and effectively and it can serve as a powerful educational tool. Students often listen and take constructive criticism from their peers with a different mindset than they do from faculty or advisors. However, students are also often loath to criticize their peers, rendering peer review much less effective. Putting peer review into the context of responsible conduct provides students with the information needed to appreciate how their efforts are meant to be helpful and how they fit into their scientific education. In any class that incorporates peer review (or literature review), students should be introduced to the anonymous peer review processes used for manuscript submissions and grant proposal reviews. It is important that students recognize that peer review is a fundamental part of any career in science and that we all perform peer reviews as a service to our disciplines to insure that the best possible work is funded or published. Emphasis and discussion should focus on what makes a good review (constructive criticism, professional language, clear examples) versus a bad review (vague suggestions, inappropriate language etc.). Students need to appreciate that reciprocation is the key: they should put as much effort into constructively critiquing their peers as they hope to receive themselves. Then, students could be asked to read and critique part or all of a classmate’s laboratory report, before the final version is turned in.
Data Acquisition and Laboratory Tools; Management, Sharing, and Ownership Of course, data acquisition and recordkeeping are important topics that are typically addressed on the first day of class when instructors lay out their expectations for laboratory notebooks. We all know that the importance of proper recordkeeping is fundamental to research and the adequacy of a student’s notebook should be part of their grade for any laboratory class. To put data acquisition into an RCR context, discussions (presumably on the first day of class) should focus on the importance of recordkeeping and
Hendrickson
the consequences of poor data management. With respect to a laboratory course, the consequences can be inaccuracies or missing data that is necessary to complete a laboratory report; or confusion or the appearance of misconduct with respect to the assignment of contributions. Proper data acquisition and recording optimizes a students success in class and can protect their integrity, should the need arise. The importance of management, sharing and ownership of data is going to vary depending on the nature of the course and aspects of the corresponding RCR topics were discussed above in Section 4: Collaborative Research.
Research Misconduct and Policies for Handling Misconduct Research misconduct is arguably the most important topic for an RCR program. For laboratory courses, which are instructional rather than research, the concepts of research misconduct tie closely with those of academic misconduct. Obviously, young scientists need to be prepared for their careers in ways that encourage them to conduct their research endeavors beyond reproach, setting the highest possible standards for themselves. But, they also need to be prepared for the possibility that they might find themselves as unwitting stakeholders in some kind of misconduct or allegations therein (whether founded or unfounded). Empowering young scientists to behave responsibly and to take appropriate action when wrongdoing is observed is fundamentally important for their career development and for the scientific community. However, it can be difficult to integrate discussions of research misconduct into the context of a laboratory course. One approach is simply to make the students aware of the correlations between academic and research misconduct. Instructors typically discuss their expectations for academic honesty and collaboration and they define the consequences of misconduct (e.g., failing the class, receiving a zero grade for an assignment, being turned in to the appropriate university administrative group, etc.). Parallels can be drawn to real-world cases so that students can see that serious consequences can follow them throughout their careers. (There are innumerable resources for case studies online, both real and fictional. For a couple of recent, high-profile examples see Refs. [12, 13].) It can be difficult to have these discussions without discouraging students from careers in science, and so it is important to remind students that the vast majority of scientists are honest, ethical practitioners. There best approach to a rewarding career in the sciences is to hold themselves and their peers to the highest ethical standards. One aspect of RCR that is not always explicitly discussed is the idea of approaching one’s own data analysis from a highly critical position, playing Devil’s Advocate, so to speak. Most instructors naturally encourage their students to critically think about their results and to propose
73
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education explanations for what might have gone wrong when an experiment does not work. In laboratory classes, where the experiments can be very straightforward and/or optimized for success, we do not always ask our students to propose alternative interpretations or additional experiments when discussing their results. Throughout our research education as scientists, we become adept at criticizing our own results, looking for other interpretations that deviate from our favored hypothesis. This approach encourages us to think critically about our own data, eliminating as much personal bias as we can from our analyses. This skill is important for our career development and success and, in the context of RCR, it strengthens our conclusions and enhances the reliability and reproducibility of results, critical components of RCR. Introducing more of this type of self-critical data analysis into laboratory courses is another logical way to encourage students to be more mindful about their data and conclusions.
Responsible Authorship and Publication Methods for introducing authorship and publication issues into undergraduate laboratory courses were discussed in Section 4: Collaborative Research.
The Scientist as a Responsible Member of Society, Contemporary Ethical Issues in Biomedical Research, and the Environmental and Societal Impacts of Scientific Research This final talking point posed by NIH is the most esoteric because it does not address day-to-day issues of RCR. However, it can also be the most engaging when introducing RCR to undergraduates because it ties their educational program to the outside world. The goal behind this topic is to instill in scientists the importance of maintaining useful, open dialog with non-scientists about modern research accomplishments and the impact that they may have on society. The challenge is that scientists are often most comfortable talking about their own work to their scientific peers. Scientific research is driven by curiosity and goals for the betterment of society and yet most members of society have only casual levels of understanding about what scientists do and how current scientific research might benefit them in the future. The diversity of modern scientific research topics important to scientists and to society is innumerable and highly topical (e.g., stem cell research, antibiotic resistance, climate change, renewable energy, personalized medicine and the human genome etc.). By more enthusiastically and effectively engaging nonscientists into discussions about the importance of these topics, the public trust in the scientific endeavor can be upheld, with benefits that could readily extend into areas like politics, increased federal support for research, stronger scientific education programs, and greater recruitment of talent into scientific fields. Encouraging undergraduates to participate in their communities as scientists is a logical
74
first step to establish a lifetime pattern of outreach and engagement. While the importance of this topic is evident, mechanisms to encourage undergraduate students in a laboratory course to engage with their peers are less obvious and are going to be best tailored to a given course or experiment. One approach, when introducing a new experiment, would be to have class discussions go beyond the techniques to be learned and the expected results to include the importance of the work to society. For many biochemistry and molecular biology experiments, this type of discussion can examine the medical gains that were made from the techniques or macromolecules being studied in a given laboratory. For example, for an experiment on protein purification, discussions could include examples of proteins that are used therapeutically; DNA can touch on personalized medicine or genetic diseases, etc. Finally, and most in line with this RCR topic, students could be tasked to discuss the impact of their laboratory experiments with their peers, particularly with those who aren’t scientists, and to include a summary of this discussion in their laboratory reports. An exercise like this one will also encourage students to gain important skills with respect to presenting science to their non-scientific peers.
Conclusions Explicit RCR education is an important tool to instill a powerful professional code of conduct into young scientists. Laboratory courses in biochemistry and molecular biology are a perfect environment to introduce many of these topics because they introduce students to laboratory settings. With forethought, some planning and a little bit of creativity, these topics can be readily integrated into laboratory curricula. It is our responsibility to instill a strong sense of mindful, ethical thinking in our students to help them prepare for the challenges they may face in their future careers and for the benefit of science and society.
References [1] Goodstein, D. (2010) On Fact and Fraud: Cautionary Tales from the Front Lines of Science, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. [2] National Institutes of Health. NOT-OD-10–019: Update on the Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. Available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10– 019.html. Accessed on January 30, 2015. [3] National Science Foundation. Responsible Conduct of Research. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rcr.jsp Accessed on October 24, 2014). [4] Committee on Science, E. and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. (2009) On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research, 3rd ed., Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Integrating Responsible Conduct
[5] Howard, D. R. and Miskowski, J. A. (2005) Using a module-based laboratory to incorporate inquiry into a large cell biology course. Cell Biol Educ 4, 249–260. [6] Hall, M. L. and Vardar-Ulu, D. (2014) An inquiry-based biochemistry laboratory structure emphasizing competency in the scientific process: A guided approach with an electronic notebook format. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 42, 58–67. [7] Spiro, M. D. and Knisely, K. I. (2008) Alternation of generations and experimental design: A guided-inquiry lab exploring the nature of the her1 developmental mutant of Ceratopteris richardii (C-Fern). CBE Life Sci Educ 7, 82–88. [8] Wise, R. (1965) The Sound of Music.
Hendrickson
[9] Weinlander, K. M. and Hall, D. J. (2010) Designing laboratory exercises for the undergraduate molecular biology/biochemistry student: Techniques and ethical implications involved in personalized medicine. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 38, 180–187. [10] Lee, R. J. and Cohen, N. A. (2015) Role of the bitter taste receptor T2R38 in upper respiratory infection and chronic rhinosinusitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 15, 14–20. [11] Nature Journals. Nature journals’ authorship policy. Available at: http:// www.nature.com/authors/policies/authorship.html. Accessed on January 30, 2015. [12] Hayden, E. C. (2008) Chemistry: Designer debacle. Nature 453, 275–278. [13] Couzin, J. (2008) Truth and consequences. Science 313, 1222–1226.
75
