Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Английский в научных и инженерных целях. Часть 2. Учебное пособие
.pdf
Carbon energy
Cause a disease
Evaluate the risks
Come up with the solutions
Open a dialogue between the scientists developing the technology and the
people who will use it
Undermine the whole range price of making society better through providing
technological solutions to problems
Be incredibly important
Self-studies for SESSION 3:
1. Study active vocabulary list for the session. See Appendix 1.
2. Think of companies in your region that can be described as success
stories. Prepare a talk.
3. Read the text Science-Driven Innovation: The Final Frontier.
SCIENCE-DRIVEN INNOVATION: THE FINAL FRONTIER
November 4, 2013
By Donald Ingber
There has been a great deal of discussion recently about the challenges
facing our nation's academic communities: How do we support basic
curiosity-driven research and maintain our position as the global leader in
innovation and technology at a time of rapidly dwindling government funds?
This dilemma was at the heart of a workshop convened by the National
Academies in September in Washington.
One potential solution is through the creation of a new model of
transdisciplinary research that pulls together investigators from many
disciplines to focus, or converge, on high-value, near-term goals. This excites
the industrial sector because it generates information that can more quickly
translate into commercial innovation, but many people in the scientific
community are frankly terrified by this approach. As focusing on solving
specific problems in the short term could steal funds from fundamental,
investigator-driven research that delves into new terrain.
31
There is a solution to this conundrum found in the Wyss Institute for
Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University, which develops
engineering innovations by emulating how nature builds. With support from
a major philanthropic gift, and from visionary leadership at Harvard and their
affiliated hospitals and universities, they developed a new model of
innovation, collaboration, and technology translation that has attracted more
than $125-million in research support from federal agencies, private
foundations, and for-profit companies.
The approach is simple: empowering individual scientists and
engineers to turn their vision-inspired research into practical solutions to realworld problems. They are given the resources they need to translate their
basic research into technologies and then help them to develop those
technologies into commercially viable products and therapies. The research
space is not allocated to individual faculty but rather organized as
«collaboratories,» each of which is linked to a problem-oriented project.
A portion of the funds is divided among individual faculty members,
which gives complete creative freedom. A much larger investment is
funneled into «enabling technology platforms,» each devoted to exploring a
new high-risk research area. These platforms build upon the brilliant
advances that emerge from individual faculty labs to develop new
breakthrough technological capabilities. In the end, it is always people who
lead to innovation, not grant proposals or committees. So investments in
people are vital.
Abridged and adapted form chronicle.com/article/Science-Driven-
Innovation-The/142785/?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
32
TOPIC 2. SCIENCE AND SOCIETY
SESSION 4. RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND RESEARCH
MISCONDUCT. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN RESEARCH
TASK 1. Comment on the quotation.
Scientists are people of very dissimilar temperaments doing different
things in very different ways. Among scientists are collectors, classifiers and
compulsive tidiers-up; many are detectives by temperament and many are
explorers; some are artists and others artisans. There are poet-scientists and
philosopher-scientists and even a few mystics.
PETER MEDAWAR, Pluto’s Republic, Oxford University Press,
New York, 1982, p. 116.
– What kind of researcher do you think you are?
– What researchers have you met in your professional life?
– Can you think of a personality in education and science that influenced
you greatly or made a significant impact in their field of studies?
TASK 2. Read the text for thorough understanding. Pay attention to new
word combinations.
RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH
PROMOTING RCR EDUCATION AS A CENTRAL RESPONSIBILITY
FOR ANY INSTITUTION INVOLVED IN RESEARCH
«Advances in science, engineering and all fields of research depend on
the reliability of the research record, as do benefits associated with them in
areas such as health and national security,» begins the December 6, 2000,
Notice of Final Policy in the Federal Record from the Office of Science and
Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President. It continues,
«Sustained public trust in the research enterprise requires confidence in the
research record and in the processes involved in its ongoing development.»
To ensure research dependability, to maintain public support, and to
unify policies, it calls a unified definition of misconduct. The policy applies
to all agencies and all recipients of funds from federal agencies. The two
33
federal agencies that support most research in academia - the National
Science Foundation and the Public Health Service, which includes the
National Institutes of Health - have implemented the OSTP policy, for the
most part.
According to the OSTP, «research misconduct is defined as
fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or
reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Fabrication is making up
data or results and recording or reporting them. Falsification is manipulating
research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or
results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research
record. Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes,
results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Research misconduct
does not include honest error or differences of opinion.»
«Research,» according to the OSTP, «includes all basic, applied, and
demonstration research in all fields of science, engineering, and mathematics.
This includes, but is not limited to, research in economics, education,
linguistics, medicine, psychology, social sciences, statistics, and research
involving human subjects or animals. The research record is the record of
data or results that embody the facts resulting from scientific inquiry, and
includes, but is not limited to, research proposals, laboratory records, both
physical and electronic, progress reports, abstracts, theses, oral presentations,
internal reports, and journal articles.»
The policy also addresses how research institutions should manage
allegations of misconduct, which this module will address later. The Office
of Research Integrity (ORI) oversees and directs PHS research integrity
activities on behalf of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS),
with the exception of the regulatory research integrity activities of the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA). The Centers for Disease Control, the
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry all fall under the PHS aegis.
Today, plagiarism is deemed to be a serious problem facing academia.
Some examples of plagiarism include: investigators during the peer- review
process taking ideas from others’ grant proposals or articles and including
them in their own publications; students taking material from the Internet
verbatim, without attribution, during write-ups of research; and faculty taking
dissertation material from students and including it in publications without
giving due credit.
Source: Office of Research Integrity official website
http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/rcr/rcr_misconduct/foundation/index.html#1
34
TASK 3. Explain what the terms mean:
research integrity research integrity statement research misconduct
TASK 4. Read the texts from the document of research conduct regulations
designed for a particular university. Insert the missed words.
Text 1
DETERMINATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORSHIP
Authorship should be confined to those persons who have made
1) ___________ contributions to the conceptualization, design, execution,
interpretation, or writing of the work reported. All authors should be able to
explain and 2) ___________ the work. They must take 3) ___________ as
well as credit for the work. Some journals require the signatures of all authors
on a form stating that all have seen and agree with the material being
4) ___________. Individuals who have made lesser contributions such as
providing 5) ____________, analysis, subject material, or who may have
supported the research in other ways, should be 6) ____________.
advice significant responsibility
defend submitted acknowledged
Text 2
SUPERVISION OF STUDENT RESEARCH
Dissertation advisors, research directors, and administrative heads
share 1) __________ for providing the best possible research environment.
Students should be given 2) _________ recognition for their original work.
Demands made 3) ________ students should be reasonable and they should
be treated 4) ________ professional 5) ___________.
Dissertation 6) ___________ and research directors should meet regularly with
students, fellows, and other collaborators to review their work and progress.
The experience of the students should serve to prepare them to become
independent 7) __________ and researchers.
with responsibility due
courtesy upon advisors
scholars
35
Text 3
RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESEARCH DIRECTORS
The research director is responsible for close personal 1)
____________ of students, staff, and the research project in 2) ___________,
including: the design of research 3) ___________; informing each new staff
person and investigator (faculty, student, or fellow) of 4) ______________
federal, state, and institutional 5) ____________ for conducting studies
involving humans, animals, radioactive and other hazardous
6) _____________, recombinant DNA; 7) ___________ students of the
process used to obtain approval by appropriate committees, data
8) _____________ and recording, statistical analysis, interpretation of
results, preparation of manuscripts, submission and revision of manuscripts
for publication and presentations at 9) ___________ meetings.
general supervision materials
regulations applicable protocols
gathering informing scholarly
TASK 4. Comment on the readings above. Provide examples of policies at
your home university or else.
TASK 5. Now you are given types of research misconduct. Read them and
explain when they might occur.
RESEARCH MISCONDUCT
Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism
in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research
results.
Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting
them.
Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or
processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research
method or result is not accurately represented in the research record.
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes,
results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Plagiarism does not
encompass disagreements over order of authorship, rights to publish,
or the use of ideas among collaborators.
36
Honest error or differences of opinion are not considered research
misconduct.
TASK 6. Read about an event organized and held by European Federation of
Research Academies of Sciences and Humanities (ALLEA) on the issue of
designing European Code of Conduct on Research Integrity.
ALLEA NEWS
ALLEA Hon. President P. Drenth presents European Code of Conduct
on Research Integrity at 2nd World Conference, 21-24 July 2010, Singapore
25-07-2010.
2nd World Conference on Research Integrity agrees on need to reach a
global consensus on basic principles for research integrity.
The European Code of Conduct on Research Integrity (lead author:
Pieter Drenth, hon. President ALLEA).
The conference was conceived as a follow-up with global ambitions to
the 1st World Conference on Research Integrity (Lisbon 2007). This second,
global event allowed participants, during the conference and post-conference
workshops, to exchange information and views in order to develop guidelines
and recommendations for promoting integrity in research on a global scale.
Much of the work of the conference focused on developing
recommendations for four key aspects of research integrity:
1. National and international structures for promoting integrity and
responding to misconduct,
2. Global codes of conduct and best practices for research,
3. Common curricula for training students and researchers in best
practices,
and
4. Uniform best practices for editors and publishers.
Participants also discussed a general «Singapore Statement on Research
Integrity» as a starting point for identifying the fundamental values and
principles that are common to research wherever it is undertaken.
Source: European Federation of Research Academies of Sciences and Humanities official website
http://www.allea.org/Pages/ALL/24/640.bGFuZz1FTkc.html
TASK 7. Discuss the following questions:
1. Are unified practices and standards in education and research important in
situation of research mobility?
37
2. Why different countries find it necessary to agree on the common
definition of responsible conduct of research and research misconduct and
their common regulations?
TASK 8. Read the text below and answers the questions.
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE
Responsible Science is a comprehensive review of factors that
influence the integrity of the research process. Volume I examines reports on
the incidence of misconduct in science and reviews institutional and
governmental efforts to handle cases of misconduct.
The result of a two-year study by a panel of experts convened by the
National Academy of Sciences, this book critically analyzes the impact of
today’s research environment on the traditional checks and balances that
foster integrity in science.
Responsible Science is a provocative examination of the role of
educational efforts; research guidelines; and the contributions of individual
scientists, mentors, and institutional officials in encouraging responsible
research practices.
Source: Responsible Science, Volume I: Ensuring the Integrity of the
Research Process. The national academies press, 1992.
Research misconduct http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=1864#toc
1. Are there any reviews of factors that influence the integrity of the
research process in your country?
2. Which famous cases of misconduct in science can you remember?
3. Which institutional and governmental efforts can you mention that
handle cases of misconduct?
4. What do you think can encourage responsible research practices?
TASK 9. Read and summarize the text below.
THE U.S. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ENTERPRISE
BRIEF HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
The U.S. academic research enterprise of the 1990s differs in kind and
scale from that of earlier decades. Once an informal, intimate, and
38
paternalistic endeavor, research today is conducted as part of a more formal,
complex, highly diversified enterprise that engages the talents of a broad
spectrum of individuals and institutions. The organizational structures within
which research is supported and performed, the climate within which
research is conducted, and the criteria that define scientific achievement
today are quite different from those that were in place previously.
The uniquely American multipurpose university was firmly established
in the United States by 1890 and thereafter was gradually augmented by
professional schools and institutes of technology. Because institutional
support for scientific work was scarce in the early part of the nineteenth
century, research was usually an avocation rather than a profession. Later in
the century, as the university system evolved and the idea of the pursuit of
science for its own sake gained support, research was pursued as a full-time
vocation health sciences, “a variety of informal and formal practices and
procedures currently exist in the academic research environment to assure
and maintain the high quality of research conduct”
Many scholars have noted the implicit nature and informal character of
the processes that often guide scientific research practices and inference.
Research in well-established fields of scientific knowledge, guided by
commonly accepted theoretical paradigms and experimental methods,
involves few disagreements about what is recognized as sound scientific
evidence.
In broadest terms, scientists seek a systematic organization of knowledge
about the universe and its parts. This knowledge is based on explanatory
principles whose verifiable consequences can be tested by independent observers.
Science encompasses a large body of evidence collected by repeated observations
and experiments. Although its goal is to approach true explanations as closely as
possible, its investigators claim no final or permanent explanatory truths. Science
changes. It evolves. Verifiable facts always take precedence.
Source: Responsible Science, Volume I: Ensuring the Integrity of the
Research Process. The national academies press, 1992.
Research misconduct http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=1864#toc
– See how to write a summary in Appendix 1 Session 4.
– Watch a video for more help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGWO1ldEhtQ
TASK 10. Give your definition to the term «scientific method».
Read the text and check if you are right.
Scientists operate within a system designed for continuous testing,
where corrections and new findings are announced in refereed scientific
39
publications. The task of systematizing and extending the understanding of
the universe is advanced by eliminating disproved ideas and by formulating
new tests of others until one emerges as the most probable explanation for
any given observed phenomenon. This is called the scientific method.
Science accommodates, indeed welcomes, new discoveries: its theories
change and its activities broaden as new facts come to light or new potentials
are recognized. Examples of events changing scientific thought are legion.
Truly scientific understanding cannot be attained or even pursued effectively
when explanations not derived from or tested by the scientific method are
accepted.
SOURCE: National Academy of Sciences and National Research
Council(1984), pp. 8-11
TASK 11. Read the following paragraphs and fill in the blanks with the
words that make the most sense. You will find the word that matches best in
each of the word groups below.
1 variable
scientific
control
biological
2 conclusion
data
experiment
problem
3 senses
controls
solutions
solvents
4 variable
factor
hypothesis
conclusion
5 theories
experiments
properties
none of the above
6 data
hypotheses
structures
expressions
7 meeting
consideration
laboratory
conclusion
8 solvent
control
deduction
theory
The 1) __________method is a process that scientists use to help them test
new ideas. The first step in this process usually involves defining the
2) __________. The next step involves gathering information and making
observations of natural phenomena. A way in which this can be done is by
using one or more of the five 3) __________.
After initial observations have been made, the next step usually involves the
scientist making an educated guess or a 4) __________. This is a possible
explanation of how or why the phenomena that have been observed occur.
Following this, an investigation may be carried out to determine the
plausibility of the explanation. This is usually done through performing one
or more activities that are collectively known as 5) __________.
Observations are made and recorded. These recorded observations are known
as 6) __________.
40
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]