This talk concentrates on the design of the so called Path2Integrity, which contains an idea on how to teach research integrity in 15 European contries. Path2Integrity uses role-play and storytelling as methods in formal learnin settings.

In recent years, the research community has witnessed changes not only within the scientific community (for example new techniques such as nuclear or gene technology, IT, big data or working circumstances such as financing, multiple authorships etc.) but within the relations between science and society (for example shaking public confidence in science through repeated misconduct, fraud and illegitimate evidence in research). Because breaches of integrity in science undermine the quest of new knowledge, counteract societal progress, and cause a huge waste of funding and public money, research integrity needs to be a common European value and practice.

We (a Consortium of 8 European partners) designed the project “Path2Integrity” to maximizing the quality and societal impact of research and to fostering integrity as an integral part throughout the research process. We emphasise the virtue of integrity and enable a comprehensible handling of new scientific techniques as well as compliance in the responsible conduct of research.

Since January until December 2021, the Path2Integrity project supports formal and informal learning methods  in higher eduaction and contributes to the establishment of a culture of research integrity by pursuing the following aims:

1. Establish learning paths with research integrity role-models and rotatory role-playing by developing and disseminating a Path2Integrity handbook of instructions.

2. Raise awareness with a widespread Path2Integrity campaign on scientific facts about research integrity and role-models in educational organisations.

Our aim is to provide opportunities for sustainable learning units, including principles of gender equality and diversity.

After outlining the complex project Path2Integrity (Horizon2020) in a sketch, we show an evidence-based argumentation on 1) why we decided to follow a two-component approach, 2) why we emphasize role-play, 3) why we add a train-the-trainer program, and 4) why we teach research integrity in disciplinary classes.

(Please note, that the above and following text are mainly copied sentences from the proposal text Path2Integrity, Horizon2020, Topic SwafS-02-2018 Innovative methods for teaching ethics and research integrity, Project Number: 824488, written by Julia Prieß-Buchheit and the help of the Consortium.)

For designing the project, we collected educational research results on how to teach research integrity and used these results to argue for specific processes. At the same time, we implemented an evidenced based decision process inside the project’s trajectory. Designing the Path2Integrity formal learning setting, we decided to follow a two-component approach, fostering formal and informal learning simultaneously, so that both learning environments can support and encourage each other. We concluded that we conduct dialogical units to learn research integrity, because Medeiros et al. (2017) shows in a meta-analysis for business ethics that “courses with high trainee active participation displayed the largest [learning] effects” (p. 24). Furthermore, a train the trainer program will be included, because the study from Hyytinen and Löfström (2017) reports a need for pedagogical training in research ethics and research integrity. We will constantly check the obstacle to find lecturers and teachers (who want to participate in our training), because a need for pedagogical trainings conflicts at first glance with findings from Löfstrom et al. (2015), a self-reporting by academics’ stating that academics have the competence to teach research integrity. And research integrity will be taught in disciplinary groups, because the Coburger Weg (Bender et al. 2016, p. 26 and p. 72) assessed that learning research methods including research integrity across disciplines has been a very challenging task. Taking this research and more into account we designed our path, and we additionally implemented an evidenced based decision process inside the project’s trajectory. If the audience is interested in arguments on which we relied designing the informal learning environment, we can outline these in the discussion.

Path2Integrity will foster its idea in fifteen European countries. The Path2Integrity method for learning research integrity contains rotatory role-playing and leads students to conduct dialogues on the acceptance or rejection of norms in research integrity. Because there are different disciplines and different schools of thoughts involved, the Consortium places paramount importance on explicitly ensuring that the recommendations for teaching and learning are based on optimal and systematic evidence-based decisions. To pursue this goal and to handle not yet known obstacles, the project offers a highly qualified and outstanding accompanying evaluation. Following from the overall goals of establishing learning paths by developing and disseminating a handbook of instructions and raising awareness for a research integrity culture with a campaign this project is based on educational research results and will at the same time conduct research on how usable the learning units are.

Bender, W., Breitschwerdt, L., and Scheffel, M. (2016). Zwischen den Welten. Band 10: Grenzgänge. Interdisziplinäre Kompetenzen fördern und evaluieren. Wissenschaftliche Begleitstudie zum Projekt "Der Coburger Weg" (2011-2016) der Hochschule Coburg [Between worlds. Vol. 10: Crossings. Promote and evaluate interdisciplinary competences. Scientific accompanying study for the project "Der Coburger Weg"]. Göttingen: Cuvillier. Hyytinen, H. and Löftsröm, E. (2017). Reactively, Proactively, Implicitly, Explicitly? Academics’ Pedagogical Conceptions of how to Promote Research Ethics and Integrity, Journal for Academic Ethics, 15(1), p. 23-41, online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-016-9271-9. Medeiros et al. (2017) What is Working, What is Not, and What We Need to Know: a Meta-Analytic Review of Business Ethics Instruction, Journal for Academic Ethics, online: DOI 10.1007/s10805-017-9281-2. Shephard, K. et al. (2015) Teaching research integrity in higher education: policy and strategy, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(6), p. 615-632, DOI:10.1080/ 1360080X.2015.1102823