1st HEIRRI Conference - book of abstracts by HEIRRI

1st HEIRRI Conference Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation at University CosmoCaixa Science Museum, Barcelona, Spain Friday 18th March, 2016

Book of abstracts

Project led by:

Conference organized by:

Title: 1st HEIRRI Conference. Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation at University Editor: Sergio Villanueva Baselga HEIRRI Coordination: Gema Revuelta de la Poza (Principal Investigator), Núria Saladié Elias (Project Manager) La Caixa Foundation: Ignasi López Verdeguer, Belén Perat Rodríguez, Daniel García Jiménez, Sergio Villanueva Baselga 1st HEIRRI Conference Scientific Committee: Gema Revuelta de la Poza, Núria Saladié Elias, Mar Carrió Llach, Roger Strand, Niels Meijlgaard, Ana Marusic, Marta Cayetano i Giralt, Nadia Gmelch, Michael Creek, Alex Lang, Daniel García Jiménez, Sergio Villanueva Baselga Fundació Bancària ”la Caixa” Avinguda Diagonal 621-629 08028 - Barcelona obrasociallacaixa.org ISBN: 978-84-9900-157-9

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0> or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.

Table of Contents Introduction....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Panel 1 - Training on Research and Innovation for industry: needs and challenges....................... 9

Overview by co-chairs............................................................................................................................................................ 9

RRI clinics, RRI Guidelines and RRI implementation plans: raising awareness of RRI for technology development...................................................................................................................................................... 12

Influence of the satisfaction with an international project of marketing learning on the perceived competences in the European Higher Education Area........................................................................ 13

Responsible Research and Innovation at Technical Universities – Challenges and Opportunities...................... 14

Responsible Education of Young Entrepeneurs – The Case Study of the Climate-KIC Innovative Programme ‘The Journey’...................................................................................................................................................... 15

Smart drones for journalism. Teaching students how to be creative using innovation pedagogics..................... 16

Overview by co-chairs............................................................................................................................................................17

Multicultural Constructive Community learning course for Education in Sustainability....................................... 19

Responsible research and innovation applied to human rights and higher education............................................ 20

A Study on Visitors’ Identity-related Motivations at Science Museums in China.................................................... 21

Performing RRI in science education: How to measure the impact?.......................................................................... 22

Teaching gender equality in a classroom of Spanish as a foreign language............................................................... 23

The “Ment Sana” Project: A proof of concept on how to empower students to enter into the system of RRI ........................................................................................................................................................... 24

RRI in Industry: The SNIFFPHONE Project...................................................................................................................... 11

Panel 2 - Dialoguing with University: transdisciplinarity as a key for RRI Learning....................... 17

Panel 3 - Adapting curricula to future researchers: how to foster RRI in postgraduate levels.... 25

Overview by co-chairs............................................................................................................................................................25

“Theory of Science” – Wissenschaftstheorie – as a Way to Teach RRI...................................................................... 31

Teaching reproducible research in bioinformatics ...........................................................................................................32

Science in Action: teaching scientific integrity to early career scientists.................................................................. 30

Be SAGER, increase relevance in research through sex and gender equity............................................................... 33

How to become R.I.CH: a one-day interactive workshop to increase confidence in research integrity issues......................................................................................................................................................... 34

Panel 4 - Changing structures: the RRI paradigm within institutions................................................. 35

Overview by co-chairs............................................................................................................................................................35

GenPORT: articulating RRI through Gender Equality in Science ................................................................................ 37

Service Learning Programme at Universitat Rovira i Virgili: the promotion of social university responsibility ........................................................................................................................................ 38

Is work climate important for RRI training? Cross sectional study of perceptions of ethical climate and pressures in different faculties at the University of Split, Croatia...................................... 39

Integrating RRI through ethics committees at university level. From reviewing to teaching and capacity building ....................................................................................................................................... 39

Potential and Challenges of Implementing RRI Postgraduate Education: A Case from Japan.............................. 41

Poster Panel....................................................................................................................................................... 42 Hypatia Project: a gender sensitive framework to put in practice gender inclusiveness in STEM...................... 42 Learning Skills: how far away are businessmen and graduates?................................................................................... 43

Female Entrepreunership in Europe and an example of the WINGS project designed for its support ................44

Incorporating Service Learning in Business and Economics Education.......................................................................45

Studio-based teaching-learning tool as a RRI methodology within the design of water bottles......................... 46

Enhancing Responsible Research and Innovation through Curricula in Higher education.................................... 47

Sparks project: how to effectively communicate RRI to citizens?............................................................................... 48

Walking the city: social interactions in learning through the urban environment................................................... 49

Introducing research ethics and bioethics into biosciences curricula at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid ..................................................................................................................................... 50

Learning engineering without avoiding the “what for” question................................................................................. 52

Experiencing of learning Catalan pronunciation learning the new website Catalan Pronunciation Guides: from self-learning to peer-learning...................................................................................................................... 51

Introduction By UPF as Coordinators On behalf of the HEIRRI Consortium, we welcome you to the Book of Abstracts of the 1st HEIRRI conference: “Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation at University”. This volume presents the abstracts of the first meeting devoted to the discussion around the integration of the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) into higher education, which gathered in Barcelona more than 150 people from over 20 countries on March 18th 2016. This conference was aimed at raising awareness about the relevance of incorporating RRI into higher education, as well as improving the visibility of the HEIRRI project. However, it was equally essential to hear the voice of attendees and translate their valuable insights and ideas into real input for the proper development of the project. The 1stHEIRRI conference emphasized how important it is that, while in university, the future generations of scientists and engineers don’t stay away from the society they will be working for –as it has been the case until now–. On the contrary, these students have to be aware, already during their early training, that their professional and intellectual activity will have important consequences. Moreover, RRI training should allow them to know the tools to anticipate, as far as possible, the impact of their work (helped by society and its different stakeholders), and also enable them to make more appropriate decisions. The 1st HEIRRI conference was a great success. We would like to warmly thank all of you for your interest, for spending the day with us in Barcelona, for sharing your experience with the rest of the audience, and for the intense and refreshing discussions that sparked both ‘in situ’ and through the social media (specially using the hashtag #HEIRRIconf). Thank you, and see you soon! HEIRRI Coordination team

Foreword by “La Caixa” Foundation The Research and Innovation (R&I) system is under heavy pressure and profound transformation. While society increasingly relies on R&I to address the challenges of our time -such as climate change, global health, sustainable development, scarcity of resources, or privacy and security issues-, the R&I system itself is required to respond to social demands on greater transparency, inclusion regarding gender and minorities, ethics, and broader societal participation. In other words, there is a clear call for more democratic research and innovation to contribute to social progress and wellbeing. Education plays a critical role in this transformation. Embedding socioeconomic and ethical principles in science education, promoting critical thinking, empowering citizens to make their own decisions on science policy, and training future scientists in sharing responsibility with all actors need to be rooted in the education system to foster and consolidate ongoing changes. In this scenario emerges the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), which tries to provide a holistic view of how the R&I system should respond and adapt to better align its functioning and outcomes to the needs, values, and expectations of society. HEIRRI (Higher Education Institutions and Responsible Research and Innovation) is a European project, funded under the Horizon 2020 programme, aimed to integrate the concept of RRI in the science and engineering degrees. The 1st HEIRRI Conference, Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation at University, held in Barcelona on March 18th organized by “La Caixa” Foundation, was the first big forum organized by HEIRRI project. It gathered contributions that presented practices and training resources on how different elements of RRI -including research integrity, gender equality, science governance, open access, public engagement, but also anticipation, diversity, inclusion, reflection, responsiveness, sustainability, transparency and others- are being integrated into higher education curricula and the learning outcomes to which they lead. This book of abstracts collects the contributions presented in the conference. Contributions, coming from different countries, contexts, and disciplines, were organized in four different parallel sessions chaired by two experts, one from the HEIRRI consortium and an external one. These co-chairs reflections open each section of this book of abstracts, contextualizing the contributions in a general topic. Apart from these four sessions, the HEIRRI conference hosted a poster session and several participatory workshops. The 1st HEIRRI Conference constituted a stimulating forum where discuss and create new ways to teach and learn how responsible research and innovation should adar to current changing times.

Panel 1 - Training on Research and Innovation for industry: needs and challenges Overview by co-chairs Giulia Bubbolini (Centro per l’Innovazione e lo Sviluppo Economico) and Roger Strand (Uniersitetet i Bergen)

The panel consisted of 6 individual presentations. The presentation format – 7 minutes presentations was challenging to most of the presenters, and we expect that more depth could have emerged under different time constraints. Good practices illustrated by panelists can be divided into two categories:

• methodologies and tools to embed RRI concepts in close-to-market innovation processes;

• multi-stakeholder and hands-on learning environments on business innovation processes.

As for the first category of good practices (methodologies and tools to embed RRI concepts in close-to-market innovation processes), the Sniffphone and the RRI Clinics cases both epitomize how the closer we get to the market (the higher the TRL), the more critical the need to be specific in defining RRI becomes. The industry needs to be able to use methodologies and tools that turn RRI into specific scenarios, allowing strategic decisions and design choices. A key issues is that of stakeholder engagement, which must be cost-effective and relevant, meaning users must come effectively into the picture. However, how to select end-users, how to inform them, keep them committed and keen is still to be investigated. Effective end-users engagement tools are most awaited by enterprises. Experiences also hinted that “selling” RRI to enterprise (particularly if small and medium), demands a benefit-based, case-based approach: enterprises are interested into receiving answer to very practical questions as to how RRI fits in their current strategies and practices, how it can enhance them and to what extent they need to change their innovation processes in order to achieve (which) expected benefits. Students must be trained to be prepared to provide such expertise. As for good practices on participative, multi-stakeholder learning environments, experiences ranged from supporting efforts to generate sustainable business ideas in an open cooperative environments where students received senior support, but were the main actors, to co-design of possible technical university curricula responding to industry needs by means of explorative workshops. Although different in their aim and structure, experiences highlight RRI still remains a set of guiding principles rather than a framework to generate marketoriented innovation. It is about time that students are presented with methodologies and tools, besides being

involved in exchanging idea and further digging the principles only, so they can be the agents of RRI when they start their careers as engineers, managers, etc. In the context of teaching or disseminating RRI in the HEIRRI project, we would like to add four observations: First, several of the contributions indicated that a lot can be achieved by means that are not comprehensive or necessarily demand a lot of resources. For example, the “RRI canvas” presented by Ikonen et al is a quite simple concept and can be implemented without the need for massive education of the implicated actors. This is no argument against the need for solid and deep knowledge of RRI; but it shows that the actual practice may be quite simple. Secondly, also illustrated by the RRI canvas, a success factor may be the extent to which one is able to build upon something that is already known to the actors. In the case of the RRI canvas, the actors were familiar with the concept of the “business canvas”. This is in line with pedagogical theory all the way back to Søren Kierkegaard: “If one is truly to succeed in leading a person to a specific place, one must first and foremost take care to find him where he is and begin there.” Third, while several of the presentations did not explicitly address RRI, or did so in a way quite different from the standard literature in academia and policy, they nevertheless provided interesting, creative perspectives for RRI. One striking example was the presentation by Nyre et al, who try to make students aware of RRI and responsibility by consciously letting them be involved with technological risk (free-flying drones). In the synthesis workshop (Workshop 4) later in the day, there was a discussion as to whether there is the danger of conflating RRI and responsibility, and a dilution of the RRI concept. One of us (Strand) argued that this risk is no obstacle to drawing upon these resources as long as the practitioners have some depth in their understanding of RRI. Responsibility and RRI are not the same; however, there is a lot of inspiration to be found in the diversity of ways of teaching responsibility for practitioners who know what RRI specifically is about. A final observation, exemplified by several presentations but above all that of Klucznik-Töro, is that the human aspect is vital. Indeed, since RRI ultimately is a concept of trying to align facts and artefacts with (human and societal) values, RRI practices should be attentive and sensitive to human dimensions such as emotions, creativity, friendship etc. This is not an optional “extra” to be added onto the conceptual content – it should be integrated within it.

RRI in Industry: The SNIFFPHONE Project Pearson, J1, Ikonen, V2 1

University of Namur, Belgium

VTT, Finland

This paper describes an RRI training session that was carried out as part of the Horizon 2020 project SNIFFPHONE in October 2015. The aim of the training was to adapt Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA) methodologies to foreground ethical and societal issues, and encourage all the partners involved in the project to anticipate and reflect on them. The SNIFFPHONE project aims to develop a smartphone compatible device that can be used to detect cancer. The project includes stakeholders from a number of backgrounds â&#x20AC;&#x201C; particularly industry, academia, medicine. The consortium includes both large industrial enterprises (Siemens AG) and small and medium enterprises (Microfluidic ChipShop GMBH; Cellix, Ltd). In particular, socio-technical scenarios were identified as an especially useful CTA tool. Socio-technical scenarios present alternative hypothetical situations that can emerge if a technology is adopted. They encourage reflection on choices that have to be made when developing a new technology, and help prevent narrowing of the scope of reflection. Although the scenarios are hypoethical, it is important that they are well founded and credible so that actors will respond to them well. In the case of SNIFFPHONE, several scenarios were developed on the basis of previous work in medical diagnostics (Boenink, 2011) and adapted to the specific features of the SNIFFPHONE technology. The initial exercise generated a number of useful results. First, it was found that the scenarios provide a good introduction to an important RRI methodology because they connect RRI to the practical concerns and content of the project. They provide a low-cost way to introduce reflection on stakeholdersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; possible concerns and thus open the way to deeper reflection and inclusion of stakeholders. The scenarios helped to clarify and foreground some important ethical considerations (particularly the question about whether to target SNIFFPHONE at developing countries). The scenarios can also be refined and developed for further stakeholder engagement exercises later in the project, and can be used to improve communication between internal stakeholders and external actors. .

RRI clinics, RRI Guidelines and RRI implementation plans: raising awareness of RRI for technology development Ikonen, V1, Pearson, J2,Gianni, R, Yaghmaei, E3 1

VTT, Finland

University of Namur, Belgium

University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

This paper describes RRI clinics sessions that were carried out as part of the Horizon 2020 project preparations at VTT in the end of December 2015.We will share our experinces of those sessions and give some recommendations for further development of this kind of activity. Tha agenda of clinics was the following. RRI for H2020 Seminar and clinics at VTT Tampere (Tue 15 Dec 2015) and VTT Espoo (Wed 16 Dec 2015) Schedule 12-12.15

Welcome and introduction / Dr, Principal Investigator Mika Nieminen, VTT

12.15-13

Responsible Research and Innovation H2020 project preparation / Dr. John Pearson, University of

Namur, Belgium 13-13.45

Addressing RRI in industry / Dr. Emad Yaghmaei, Southern University of Denmark

13.45-14

Coffee Break

14-15.30

RRI clinic for H2020 project preparation

15.30-16

General discussion and ending

Besides RRI clinics we will share our expeiences from industry when introducing them RRI guidelines and implementation plan produced in GREAT and Responsible-Industry projects to be taken into account use by various stakeholders.

Influence of the satisfaction with an international project of marketing learning on the perceived competences in the European Higher Education Area Argila-Irurita, A. and Arroyo-Cañada, F. J., University of Barcelona

The great variety of studies and universities in the framework of the European Higher Education Area require to know the satisfaction degree of the students and how is possible to attend its needs. The teaching methods are changing towards continuous process of acquiring competences that will improve their professional profile. This abstract presents a teaching methodology, the International Virtual Consulting Firm (IVCF) and provides empirical evidence of the influence of satisfaction on the perception of acquired competences. This project responds to the need of new teaching methodologies to approximate the students to the professional profile demanded by enterprises and achieve high levels of students’ satisfaction. The Universities can be use these results to incorporate similar methodologies in their study plans to improve the attractiveness of their marketing studies. The IVCF is an international educational program based on cooperation between higher learning partner institutions in Barcelona, Paris and Amsterdam. The students work in mixed multicultural teams as junior consultants and teachers have the role of senior consultants to guide the work of the groups. Students investigate and design marketing and communication solutions for “real-case” client assignments of the civil society. Students use information and communication systems through the Internet (Skype, Messenger MSN, e-mail etc., and a specific web site created for the project). In the IVCF have been working on cases in the fields of Transportation, City Development, Music, Art, Finances, Leisure, Fashion cooperating with a number of important enterprises and companies in our cities with real life like Vueling, Gran Teatre del Liceu de Barcelona, Muziektheater Amsterdam, Stedelijk Museum, MACBA, 22@, Zuidas, Brouwerij t Ij, Moritz, La Caixa, Parc Zoològic de Barcelona, DUWO, Eurolines, Amsterdam Economic Board or Messika Paris.

Responsible Research and Innovation at Technical Universities â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Challenges and Opportunities Griessler, E, Altenhofer, M 1

VTT, Finland

In the European context there is a strong link between technical universities and industry both in terms of research and research funding. This interrelation and interdependence is particularly challenging when it comes to integrating concepts such as RRI in both research and teaching settings. In an explorative workshop at the Vienna University of Technology (Austria), the Institute for Advanced Studies Vienna invited a heterogeneous group of representatives from research, research funding, industry, advocacy groups, and civil society organisations to discuss the concept of RRI in the context of a technical university, to define challenges in RRI-based research settings, and to identify measures and solutions for integrating RRI. While the workshop was originally geared to research at a technical university, due to universitiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; close interrelation between research and teaching, the project provided several valuable outcomes and approaches for incorporating RRI in curricula. In our presentation, we will address how the project did so in two ways: Firstly, we will show how the workshop design used in this project provides a favourable approach for identifying and developing integrative research and teaching settings in the sense of RRI. Secondly, we will highlight challenges which technical universities particularly face when addressing RRI (e.g. questions of intellectual property in industry-financed research), and will show how these could be approached.

Responsible Education of Young Entrepeneurs – The Case Study of the Climate-KIC Innovative Programme ‘The Journey’ Klucznik-Tӧrő,A1, Heron, K2, Hancox, I3 1

International Center for Entrepreneurship, Poland

Henley Centre for Entrepreneurship, UK

University of Warwick, UK

The objective of the presentation is to share the practical experiences from the intensive summer school “The Journey”. The Audience will hear about some good practices for other summer schools and summer curses organisers. Speaker(s) also wish to contribute to the research on experiential/action learning and cohort based learning. The succession of ‘the Journey’ schools were organised under the umbrella of the European Institute for Innovation and Technology (EIT) by the education pillar of Climate–Knowledge and Innovation Community (Climate-KIC). The school involves some top European universities such as the Imperial College London, Denmark Technical University, University of Warwick, Henley Business School of Reading University, University of Bologna, Technical University of Berlin, and many others. “The Journey” has been organised since 2010. It gathers top-talented Master and Doctoral students from all-over the world who are interested in climate-change issues and have an entrepreneurial spirit. The school involves also professionals from various disciplines and offers support for individual and teamwork development. The participation of the students is fully funded. The primary aim of all “The Journey” summer schools is to provide the students with a practical support to extend and deepen their knowledge and interests in climate change issues, and to lead those interests towards solid entrepreneurial ideas and professional business plans. In particular, students are coached in a process of experiential action learning with the objective of producing innovative, team-based, climate-related business start-up ideas. A multi-disciplinary nature of the students, speakers and coaches as well as the different locational contexts is designed to provide a rich variety of perspectives to act as a catalyst for divergent and creative thinking. It was anticipated that this would produce a range of innovative and commercially viable business propositions.

Smart drones for journalism. Teaching students how to be creative using innovation pedagogics Nyre, L, Gynnild, A, Guribye, F Department of Information Science and Media Studies, University of Bergen, Norway

Innovation pedagogics (Darsø 2012) aims to teach students to become more innovative or creative by giving them responsibility for a development process. We are trying this approach in reation to drone technology, more specifically teaching students to make responsible designs and services for drones in a university course. We consider two types of responsibility.

1) Avoiding danger. Drones have high risk elements, and can be dangerous for the pilot as well as

bystanders. There is also a real risk of misuse of images by actors with evil intent. It is worth noting that drone flying for educational pursposes is illegal in the USA at the moment.

2) Serious journalism. Quality journalism is bound by ethical requirements, and expectations about

truth, relevance and interest, and in this sense it is responsible. We consider journalism to be a neglected, but very important aspect of the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) paradigm. We report from a course module with 12 students in three groups, who are being taught drone flying, programming of the “brain” of the drone, and also taught how to make elementary “prototypes” of function or service that is partly automated and “smart” or “intelligent”. The process has three iterations, workshops with evaluation and instructions. The insights from this course can ideally be integrated into higher education curricula and their learning outcomes. The course takes place in the spring of 2016 at the University of Bergen, Norway in collaboration with University of Jyväskylä, Finland. The mother project, VisMedia, is a cross-disciplinary project about responsible adoption of visual surveillance technologies in news media. It is is funded by the Norwegian Research Council, and is interdisciplinary with representatives from the humanities, social sciences, and information science.

Panel 2 - Dialoguing with University: transdisciplinarity as a key for RRI Learning Overview by co-chairs Aude Lapprand (Fondation Sciences Citoyennes) and Nadja Gmelch (Associació Catalana d’Universitats Públiques)

Introduction of the session has been performed by Nadja Gmelch, reminding all participants a formal definition of the transdiscplinarity, as the highest form of integrated project, involving not only multiple disciplines, but also multiple non-academic participants in a manner that combines interdisciplinarity with participatory approaches (Stock & Burton). Following this observation, one could only propose to enlarge the dialoguing space of the panel within and outside university. After the overall description of the session, 5 of the 6 contributions initially planed have been successfully shared with the assistance and gave a very concrete illustration of the RRI inclusion into pedagogic approaches in the Higher Education Institutions. Two of the presentations demonstrated the interest of problem-base learning projects, giving by this way a good possibility of students’ empowerment. After 7 years of existence, the “Multicultural constructive community learning course for education in sustainability” described by J. Segalas did allow active study cases by the students, where both the methodology and the project aim are on line with RRI recommendations. The chosen topics relates to sustainability challenges within multiscale spaces and multidisciplinary team projects. The only hindrance for this approach to be continued is nowadays a funding issue. “The “Ment Sana” project: a proof of concept on how to empower students to enter into the system of RRI” constitutes another example of very good practices of participatory RRI, presented by R. Malagrida. In a similar way, the idea of the project is to foster a community based participatory research, which should follow RRI quality criteria, especially for students’ engagement. This problem-base learning project deals with stress and depression as health issues, according to the students’ choice. T. Bueno Doral (“Responsible research and innovation applied to human rights and higher education”) and M. Delgado Alfaro (“Teaching gender equality in a classroom of Spanish as a foreign language”) focused their oral contributions on the description of original pedagogical approaches, and especially the use of film tools as an invitation to the reflection. Teaching gender or human rights as part of the RRI pillars needs pedagogical strategy for the critical thinking in higher education institutions with minor sensitivity to such topics. Diversity of

approaches could be assured by the close collaboration with NGOs. The interest of film self-production is also a highlight of one of the project. In order to fully estimate the efficiency of the different methods to stimulate studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; engagement in RRI, assessment methodology is strongly needed. Within the Horizon 2020 PERFORM project, an innovative and participatory study performs a review of the current assessment landscape, identifies the existing tools and the further needs for more RRI evaluation development. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Performing RRI in science education: How to measure the impactâ&#x20AC;? has been a widely questioned project during the panel discussion, illustrating the high interest of the community for the work submitted by M. Heras &al. The debate moderated by Aude Lapprand centered on four main questions. Regarding the experiences itself, participants were asked to reflect about how they succeeded to get over the skepticism of teachers and researchers while promoting their activity and how important the RRI involvement on behalf of the institutions have been in the implementation of the activity. A second set of questions was raised around the issue of the potential use of the presented activities and methodologies, questioning whether it would be feasible to transfer the project outside the own institution and how these isolated initiatives could become mainstream in the respective universities. One of the main challenges discussed is the absence of financial support to implement these kinds of activities. This contrasts with the high level of motivation of students which might facilitate the introduction and the encouragement of RRI teaching and learning in higher education institutions. There was even an example of a crowdfunding campaign for RRI Teaching organized by enthusiastic students.

Multicultural Constructive Community learning course for Education in Sustainability Segalas, J., Tejedor, G University Research Institute for Sustainability Science and Technology, Universitat PolitĂ¨cnica de Catalunya. Barcelona, Spain

The International Seminar on Sustainable Technology Innovation is a course offered in the framework of the master of Sustainability of the UPC-Barcelona Tech University and financed by the ERASMUS Intensive Program scheme. It introduces Backcasting scenarios methodology in real sustainability problems. The learning environment is international, transdisciplinar, intergenerational and intercultural. It includes stakeholdersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; dialogues and discussions. The course is organized around current sustainability relevant topics that are analysed in study cases based in different contexts: going from developed to developing countries and from local to global cases. Students apply scenario methodologies to the study cases in order to set up the most contextualized sustainable strategies. The course is structured in four phases: first the local situation analysis where students analyse the topic on their own countries/regions; then students are grouped in international multidisciplinary teams and define the state of the art of the case studies; afterwards students, lecturers and stakeholders meet in Barcelona where the course is run for two weeks and finally students analyse their learning experience in terms of competences acquisition. The topics analysed in the course vary each year and are related to relevant sustainability challenges: urban solid waste management; food & drinks packaging waste; overfishing and marine ecosystem degradation; sustainable mobility, agro-ecology, sustainable community energy systems and sustainable clothing. The course has been run for seven years with the participation of more than 250 students, 40 lecturers and 80 stakeholders from 18 countries. After seven years, the Seminar has achieved much more than a purely cognitive theoretical type of learning. The community-oriented case studies, together with the stakeholders and social movement dialogues, bring together academia and society. The course has been shown to be an area with enormous potential to bring social needs to the world of ideas, beyond a learning space.

Responsible research and innovation applied to human rights and higher education. Bueno Doral, T1, Hänninen, L1 and García Castillo, N2 1

Faculty of Communication, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain

Independent Researcher, Madrid, Spain

The present proposal explains the development of the methodology of Real Social Project during term 20152016 in the frame of the research project Fostering a Transition towards Responsible Research and Innovation Systems (FoTRRIS) funded by the Horizon 2020 Program of the European Commission. The method of Real Social Project, which has been continuously used by our research team at the Faculty of Communication (Complutense University of Madrid) since 2005, consists of research applied to human rights and of real communication projects for NGOs carried out by students that are overseen by lecturers. These initiatives that include RRI into higher education curricula have been recognized and funded by Complutense University of Madrid as projects of Innovation and Improvement of Teaching Quality. To the usual activities of the Real Social Project, we have to add during term 2015-2016 the diffusion of human rights by means of documentary cinema, as well as the organization of the “IV Convention Africa Exists” by advertising students on December 15th. By one hand, this latest edition of ‘Africa Exists’ allows all members of the University community to become aware of diverse topics related to this continent, such as childhood, refugees, information and mass media or entrepreneurship. All that thanks to some NGOs like AMREF-Flying Doctors, África Directo, Fundación Sur, Asociación Museke and TYAD. By the other hand, the project of diffusion of human rights in Lima with documentary cinema, funded by Banco Santander, is a small-scale example of the application of responsible research and teaching innovation to the capital city of Peru. Peruvian students analyze the use of experimental documentary cinema as a tool of social questioning and transformation that fosters an egalitarian world. In the same way, the self-production of the films is encouraged because it provides more autonomy for social criticism and for the freedom in the defense of human rights.

A Study on Visitors’ Identity-related Motivations at Science Museums in China Chu, H Department of Science and Technology Studies, University College London (UCL)

In 2009, US scholar John H Falk published his book Identity and the Museum Visitor Experience. In this book, he introduces the concept of the “the Museum Visitor Experience Model” and categorises visitors into five groups: Explorer, Facilitator, Experience seeker, Professional/Hobbyists, and Recharger. This theoretical model is the result of empirical work arising from his research, based mostly in the US. There is no relevant research on this topic conducted under other cultural and social backgrounds, especially in China. By questionnaire survey and face-‐to-‐face interview, my project is conducted to find out what are the identity-‐related motivations (or categories) of visitors at China’s science museums, and what are the connections or relationships between visitors’ demographics (and other features) and their motivations. I have done more than 1200 questionnaires in three science museums in China to collect enough statistically significant data and all interview work also has been done. Based on the results I have gotten, it is clear that female visitors have advantages both in numbers and education levels. Also, more non-‐science background visitors than science background visitors. More important, Chinese visitors do not have so clear five motivation categories as US museum visitors. I will discuss my results and conclusions. Further more, I will try to do a deep analysis on the reason of these phenomena. Science museums are informal but popular learning places for university students. According to my survey, university students account for a big percentage in all visitors. By knowing them better what their motivations are and their knowledge about science museum will be helpful to university education. Also, my project can be an attempt to explore how to apply this western science communication theory in Chinese cultural background, and it can contribute to the science museum study in China by introducing a new theoretical model and help the English science communication world know the situation of China’s science museums.

Performing RRI in science education: How to measure the impact? Heras, M1, Ruiz-‐Mallén, I2 1

Institut de Ciencia i Tecnologia Ambientals (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain

IN3, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC), Barcelona, Spain

Engagement and creative learning are essential from the lenses of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). When applied to science education contexts, the RRI approach focuses on the importance of enhancing students’ social capacities within scientific practice, training key competences, adopting a gender perspective and reflecting on the learning process. Within this context, the Horizon 2020 PERFORM project explores new science education methods based on the performing arts and their capacity to promote and transmit the human dimension of science and the RRI values, while teaching STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects. Through a participatory educational process, PERFORM facilitates direct interaction between students, their teachers and early career researchers as a mean for linking young people with real science and embedding the values of the RRI approach. In order to assess the efficiency of these methods to stimulate students’ engagement with RRI values, an innovative and participatory assessment methodology has been built. In the emerging and open field of RRI, developing relevant and integrative assessment methods is not only a crucial need, but also a challenging task. For that purpose, we reviewed the current assessment landscape in science education and RRI. How are RRI process requirements and values being currently assessed in science education projects across disciplines? What are the assessment frameworks behind? What are the main gaps and challenges? As a result of such review we identified relevant frameworks, expert-‐ based indicators and evaluation criteria for RRI evaluation. Our findings provide insights on the needs, potential directions and challenges of assessment developments within RRI-‐oriented scientific education.

Teaching gender equality in a classroom of Spanish as a foreign language Delgado Alfaro, M Centre for Development, Volunteering and Institutional Relations, Inclusion Department, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid, Spain

Higher education has the moral responsibility to educate their students to become competent professionals, committed to work in an environment of gender equality. In our conference we will cover academic experiences of men and women working together as peers. One of the shortcomings of our society is poor education for equality; that without it, stereotypes, functions and roles of male and female are repeated. Here we propose to learn how to neutralize and abandon vices like androcentrism, machismo and sexism to incorporate us in the age of equality, as part of a sustainable human development. Gender equality is a value that can be taught and learned and this requires specific teaching strategies. In this conference we propose pedagogical teaching tools to address gender equality, namely the viewing of movies to exploit them with an educational purpose inviting reflection. Cinema may be a strategy to awaken the minds of our students to critical thinking, debate and communication for questioning social realities and to educate then in non-sexist human values. With cinema as an educational tool, which we have applied at University to teach Spanish as a foreign language in a multicultural environment, we will make a proposal to address a pending application subject: Gender equality in higher education. In our presentation we will discuss a conception of education viewed as a humanist program leading us towards a wise and equalitarian society that will benefit both men and women.

The “Ment Sana” Project: A proof of concept on how to empower students to enter into the system of RRI Malagrida, R 1,3, 4., Carreras, J.2, 3,5 1

Head of Unit of Public Engagement on Health Research, at IrsiCaixa

Communicator and Educator in Unit of Public Engagement on Health Research, at IrsiCaixa

Partner of EnRRICH and RRI Tools

Coordinator of “Ment Sana” & Xplore Health

Researcher in “Ment Sana”

The new paradigm of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has brought formal, non-formal and informal education to collaborate together with other stakeholders: researchers, industry, policy makers and civil society to empower todays’ and tomorrows’ citizens to be able to meaningfully participate in R&I processes, in R&I decision making and to raise interest in STEM education and careers. Under the umbrella of RRI, science education is also seen as a key aspect to be considered in coordination with other policy agendas: ethics, open access, gender equality, public engagement and governance. This holistic approach brings in a new paradigm for a transdisciplinary education that better bridges the gap between research and education and focuses on real life challenges with wide societal goals. Under this new paradigm, IrsiCaixa, in collaboration with “la Caixa” Foundation and the EC funded project EnRRICH (www.enrrich.eu), has promoted an educational project called “Ment Sana” (Healthy Mind) within the programme Xplore Health (www.xplorehealth.eu). “Ment Sana” is a Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) project run in collaboration between educators, learners, researchers and policy makers and following RRI quality criteria with the aim to design and implement health interventions, for students and with students. The link between CBPR and RRI gives rise to a proof of concept of what we call Community-Based Participatory Responsible Research and Innovation (P-RRI). The project started with a needs assessment, where students chose the topic of stress and depression among a list of health issues and built a collective agenda of interests. In a second phase, to respond to some of the identified interests, different P-RRI projects where designed in collaboration between researchers, higher education students and secondary school students. The results will be presented in a final congress where the assistants will be engaged in participatory governance methodologies to culminate the project with a final collectively designed product: a Decalogue of Recommendations that will be co-defined as well with policy makers. During the session in this congress, the “Ment Sana” project will be presented as a proof of concept on how to empower secondary and higher education students to do RRI, and in concrete P-RRI. After the presentation, group discussions on how to bridge the gap between RRI and the classroom will follow.

Panel 3 - Adapting curricula to future researchers: how to foster RRI in postgraduate levels Overview by co-chairs Andrew Rawnsley (Teeside University) and Erich Griessler (Institute für Höhere Studien, Wien)

The five presentations in Panel 3 were varied in scope. However, the topic of the panel was clear in all of the presentations and the variety of the presentations showed that different approaches and perspectives in teaching RRI at postgraduate level are possible. As a group of presentations, certain themes emerged during the presentations themselves and other issues became clearer during the questions and discussions following. Due to time constraints, the Co-chairs agreed that the best way to organise the panel was for each of the presentations to proceed in sequence without questions following each and to reserve the questions to the end in order instigate and suggest points for the discussion. It was suggested to the audience and participants that they take note of any pertinent points during the presentations to prompt discussion at the end. This worked well. The presentations Martinez-Campos et al.: Science in Action. Teaching scientific integrity to early career scientists. The course is compulsory at the university. It is directed at biomedical researchers. The course mainly addresses research integrity, wants to raise awareness and tries to communicate the human side of science. They also want to convey that society’s trust in science (which is there given survey) stems from researchers’ acting responsible. They have to act responsible. The presenters take what they call a blended approach to teach research integrity including (1) online courses, (2) moodle which includes papers and a forum and (3) interactive seminars. They consider the course as successful and students like it. The question about the impact of these measures was not addressed in the presentation. It also was not addressed whether the fact that the course is compulsory makes a difference. Karlsen et al. “theory of science” – Wissenschaftstheore – as a Way to teach RRI The presentation started out with the notion that (1) we need a new type of scientist, (2) that science fails to address big societal questions and (3) not finding the truth but quality of research (does research fit a purpose) is important. Therefore RRI is necessary. The course on ethics and science theory is required by law for each Ph.D. student. The center provides this course for each Ph.D. Student from all faculties at the University of Bergen. They use the topic of their own thesis for critical reflection and to ask several questions: (1) what

does responsibility mean in the thesis; (2) how does it relate to societal debate; (3) what questions of research integrity does it raise? (4) How does it relate to other faculties? Many of these questions are in line with RRI, e.g. What is the impact of these courses? Does it make a difference? Is it accepted by students? What are the consequences of making such courses compulsory? Are there differences between disciplines? Castelo, R. Teaching reproducible research in bioinformatics This presentation highlighted the importance of instruction in technical aspects of research which have an effect on the understanding of RRI. In particular, the distinction between reproducibility and replicability in bioinformatics and the possibility of testing outcomes. Heidari, S. et al. Be Sager, increase relevance in research through sex and gender equality Gender is one aspect of RRI. Editors are important agents of change by changing the rules of accepting publications. Research should take up and reflect gender and sex. The presentation is not concerned with teaching but with changing norms in science. The guideline is pretty new and therefore it is not yet clear, how it is accepted and what the impact will be. It is also not clear at this moment how it is implemented and disseminated. Van der Burgh: How to become R.I.CH: a one day interactive workshop to increase confidence in research integrity issues. The initiators (research integrity officers) of the course, which focuses on training the trainers, want to frame research integrity positively. It is not about catching the few frauds but to show that research integrity increases the quality of science. They also try to imbed it in the university by taking on board as much as possible all faculties from all levels. They installed a working group from all faculties which eventually developed a format and became a community of practice. It is important for them to use methods that also are fun for students. Themes observed 1) The relationship between models of delivery and the content of teaching; the variety of formats that can be used to cover diverse content when teaching. The methods used for teaching RRI or aspects of RRI emphasize

• interaction;

• problem, case orientation,

• trying to engage students by connecting with their own experience;

• engendering reflection

2) How to engage participants in RRI teaching and learning; It seems that these courses are accepted by students. However, there is not always systematic evaluation of the acceptance. It also would be interesting to know whether it makes a difference whether a course is com-

pulsory/ obligatory? This question is particularly interesting if you look at the topics of RRI addressed in the course in terms of “how close they are” to everyday work of scientists and the core of science.

• Reproducibility (Castelo) is very close to this disciplinary core because it is about data quality.

• Research integrity (Heidari et al and van der Burght) are a bit apart from this core but still rather fa-

miliar and easy to connect.

• In contrast, theory of science and sex and gender might be considered by students/professors as

unfamiliar and not connected to their work at first glance. The closeness to everyday work might have consequences for the acceptance of these courses. In other words it might make a difference whether a topic of RRI might be considered more external or internal to science by researchers/students. The question about the impact of the course, to what extent it makes a difference for the participants and the quality of such a difference was not addressed in the papers. There are indicators to believe that the courses make a difference. Young researchers talk to their peers about issues they normally don’t think about. And there is also a change in last years. Young researchers demand authorship. 3) The importance of research outputs for researchers and the role that editors/publishers play in acting as gatekeepers and/or “agents of change” for RRI and thus as a topic for focusing teaching material. The importance of reporting guidelines:

• as tools for researchers to use when reporting their work

• as tools for editorial use in reviewing submissions

• as tools for use in teaching and instruction;

4) The importance of the involvement of a broad spectrum of institutional staff with any RRI programme especially teaching RRI and the effect on institutional awareness that this involvement can achieve. Involvement of the university at all levels is important to embed the courses in the university and promote acceptance. 5) The effect of national regulation and/or compliance requirements in instigating formal RRI programmes at institutional level and the differences in the kind of RRI programmes that are offered which may correlate with the extent or lack of national compliance requirements. This area is potentially a fruitful area for further research/data. RRI could learn from CSR because some companies are very strict about CSR and implemented mechanisms and indicators. Reflections A key issue that crossed several of the points made in discussion was the need for a clear rationale for RRI teaching and learning. It became evident that the issue of rationale did not just affect the content of RRI

teaching (i.e.: why do RRI?) but that the definition of RRI itself and what it involves was also in need of a clear rationale and better definition if it is to be taught effectively. Rationale also played a part in engaging researchers, explaining RRI concepts and reminding researchers of their broader duties, other than simply producing research outputs. However, without a clear definition of RRI and its reason for existence as a specific set of ideas, then teaching RRI becomes a difficult exercise. This theme also dominated discussion in Workshop 4. Another key element that emerged initially in the presentation on RRI teaching in bioinformatics (the distinction between reproducibility and replicability) was clearly of great interest to many participants during the final discussion. An important strand of this discussion was the role of technical competence and training which is not RRI per se but that must inform or contextualise the decision making and ethical judgements that are fundamental to RRI. Importantly, the issue of distinguishing between technical-scientific matters and ethical matters emerged. It is tempting to think that these can be separated into different domains so that RRI is principally about the ethical domain in tension with the technical-scientific. The discussion on the technical training in bioinformatics showed that this cannot easily be done and that the technical and the ethical are bound up together. Teaching of RRI must, therefore, recognise this and work to develop satisfactory content on this basis. This issue may also play a role in defining RRI itself and in enabling a clearer rationale to be provided when the question ‘why RRI?’ arises. One participant observed that there are so many topics currently subsumed under the label of RRI which makes the concept fuzzy and in the end empty. Another participant responded that RRI is not object with clear boundaries, but a perspective or a process-quality of the science-society-relation. The RRI-perspective has several aspects, e.g.

• How does science communicate with society? Therefore issues of public engagement, open access,

open science and science education part of RRI. However, it is not only a question of whether science communicates with society, but also how to communicate effectively and efficiently?

• Whom does science include? When and how? This raises the question of inclusion, of gender and di-

versity. Inclusion also means that certain aspects are raised, which otherwise might have been neglected. This also includes questions of ethics.

• What are the impacts of science and innovation on society? This raises aspects of (self)reflection and

anticipation. Because RRI is a perspective and process quality of science and innovation, RRI includes many issues which at first glance might considered as something else, e.g. design, art, public relations.. These issues can help to shape the science/society relationship more inclusive, responsive and responsible.

The question about the science-society-relation is much deeper, broader and older than the concept RRI. This was already pointed out in Jacqueline Broerseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s key note (e.g. ELSA, participation, Technology Assessment, STS; inter- and transdisciplinarity). These questions will remain when the political concept of RRI might disappear. How can HEI teach students to practice a responsible science-society relation in their daily activities as researchers and innovators?

Science in Action: teaching scientific integrity to early career scientists Martínez-Campos M1, 2, Jiménez E1, 2, Thompson, E1, 2, Camí J1, 2,3 1

Health and Experimental Sciences Department, Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain

Barcelona Biomedical Research Park, PRBB, Barcelona, Spain

Fundació Pasqual Maragall, Barcelona, Spain

Science in Action is a course on Good Scientific Practice and Research Integrity which is compulsory for all students enrolled in the PhD biomedicine programme of the Pompeu Fabra University (CEXS-UPF). It is also an optional subject for students in several masters’ programmes. Science in Action has been running in different formats since 1998, the same year the Biology degree started at the UPF. The aim of this course is to raise awareness amongst young scientists about issues related to RRI including: public trust in scientists and the contribution of researchers to society (outreach, advocacy), ethics of research with humans and animals, conflict of interest, open access, transparency, and good practice in data management and record keeping. The format of the course has evolved over the years from a traditional lecture style class to a PBL-based methodology. Currently, the course has a blended learning format, consisting of an online course and six faceto-face seminars. The online course allows students to familiarise themselves with basic concepts of research integrity while the face-to-face seminars follow a problem based learning approach, with case studies, roleplays and opportunities to discussion with their peers and professors. There are two editions for approximately 120 students per academic year. However, the face-to-face seminars are always in groups of no more than 25, to enhance interaction between the students. Participation and discussion is also encouraged outside of the classroom, through the online forum (Moodle) as well as through social media. This format has been very well accepted by students, with more than 70% of the students from the 20142015 edition rating the course as excellent or very good.

“Theory of Science” – Wissenschaftstheorie – as a Way to Teach RRI Karlsen, J R, Kaiser, M, Slaattelid, R, Strand, R Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Norway

The European Qualification Framework for Higher Education specifies that ethics and ethical challenges of research should be included at all levels of higher education, and not the least at the phd level. In Norway, the national guidelines for phd programmes prescribe training in what is called “vitenskapsteori og etikk” (“Wissenschaftstheorie und Ethik” in German; it may be translated to “theory of science with ethics”). This is typically implemented as a 5-10 ECTS credits course that ends with the phd student writing an essay with a critical examination of epistemological, methodological, ethical and/or social aspects of her/his own doctoral research project. In our view, this is an excellent way of training for Responsible Research and Innovation, although the term RRI was seldom used in this context. At the University of Bergen, such courses have been a mandatory requirement in our phd programmes since the early 1990s. The Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities at this university is the responsible unit for these courses, and has trained more than a thousand phd students in “theory of science and ethics” during the latter two decades. In this talk we will outline the structure and content of our teaching and give examples from our experience with working with phd students.

Teaching reproducible research in bioinformatics Castelo, R Department of Experimental and Health Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Sequencing the human genome marked a milestone in the field of biomedicine more than a decade ago. Since then, research funding in genomics has been growing to approach $3 billion/year worldwide1. Society makes such an investment expecting substantial improvements in health care. However, the remarkable progress in our understanding of health and disease does not match the promises delivered by biomedical research2,3. Some facts consistent with this perception are: the number of approved new drugs has halved every 9 years4 since 1950, the failure to reproduce an important fraction of published research5,6, the 10-fold increase in retracted scientific articles because of fraud since 19757, or the strong positive correlation between retraction frequency and journal impact factor8. Ensuring reproducibility of wet lab procedures can be extremely challenging. In contrast, bioinformatics methods can be made reproducible if data and analysis code are available. At the UPF MSc in Bioinformatics for Health Sciences I teach a subject about genomics data analysis. I will show how within this subject students carry out a project using specific tools that ensure the reproducibility of their results. This allows the students to have a practical experience on producing reproducible research. 1. Pohlhaus & Cook-Deegan. Genomics Research: world survey of public funding. BMC Genomics, 2008. 2. Evans et al. Deflating the genomic bubble. Science, 2011. 3. How science goes wrong. The Economist, 2013. 4. Scannell et al. Diagnosing the decline in pharmaceutical R&D efficiency. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2012. 5. Ioannidis et al. Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses. Nat Genet, 2009. 6. Begley & Ellis. Drug development: raise standards for preclinical research, Nature, 2012. 7. Fang et al. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2012. 8. Retracted science and the retraction index. Infection and immunity, 2011.

Be SAGER, increase relevance in research through sex and gender equity Heidari, S1, Babor, T B2, De Castro, P3, Marušić, A4, Tort, S5, Curno M6 1

co-chair, EASE Gender Policy Committee /Reproductive Health Matters, London, UK / Geneva, Switzerland

Department of Community Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmingto, CT, USA

Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy

School of Medicine, University of Split, Croatia

Clinical Editor, Cochrane Editorial Unit, London, UK

Frontiers, Geneva, Switzerland

Background. In any field of research, from medicine to biology, humanities and social sciences, physical and environmental sciences, sex and gender differences play a very important role and influence the research outcome in a variety of ways with direct implications on the economic and financial sides. Yet sex and gender aspects are generally overlooked and underreported. With the objective to establish a methodological framework for reporting sex and gender differences (or similarities) in research, the EASE Gender Policy Committee has developed the SAGER (Sex and Gender Equity in Research) guideline targeting authors and editors for improved reporting. Objective. To show the crucial role of reporting sex and gender in research and disseminate the SAGER guideline to encourage clarity of terminology, improved study design, data analyses, reporting of results and interpretation of findings. Methods. Examples will be provided to show the effects of underreporting of sex and gender differences. Drugs, for example, have different metabolism in men and women, but lack of gender balance in clinical trials of drugs results in insufficient information on sex differences prior to approval and marketing; car safety tests, often based on male standards, show different risk for injuries among females; the effect of chemicals in the environment have been studied predominantly in men, although they can have deleterious effects on women’s reproductive health; the needs, behaviours and attitudes of women as well as men are important determinants of health and well-being, but they are often underestimated. SAGER guideline aims to highlight these issues and advocate for research that is more relevant to the entire population. Conclusion. SAGER will raise awareness about sex and gender differences in research, contribute to reduce waste and stimulate opportunities for innovation. It is also an important training tool for researchers.

How to become R.I.CH: a one-day interactive workshop to increase confidence in research integrity issues Van der Burght, S. Ghent University

In response to the increased international sensitivity to the issue, Ghent University developed an autonomous policy plan on research integrity, giving the topic a more central position in its overall research policy. By fostering the responsible conduct of research, Ghent University aims at maintaining and further improving a qualitative research environment. Next to a university wide vision and strategy, the policy plan also includes an action plan in which training is an important part. The plan foresees the organization of generic training for all those involved in research (PhD students, postdocs, professors, administrative and technical staff, etc.) Four research coordination officers have been trained by an external partner experienced in helping organizations to develop internal trainings. This train-the-trainer approach has yielded a sustainable training format that addresses researchers from all disciplines and in all stages of their research careers. More specifically, the one-day interactive workshop (1) is fully aligned with Ghent Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s overall research policy and regulations; (2) encompasses the full scope of research integrity (excluding ethical aspects of the research itself and other discipline-specific issues); (3) focuses on common examples and best practices rather than on exceptional cases of serious misconduct; (4) addresses the four most common learning styles from the ELM (Kolb). At the end of the training the participants are expected to be more proficient in recognizing research integrity issues, more confident in responding to them, and fully ready to become research integrity champions within their research environment. The proposed paper will discuss the process of developing the one-day interactive workshop on research integrity, the training format that resulted from the train-the-trainer approach as well as the first try-out sessions and the evaluation of the sessions.

Panel 4 - Changing structures: the RRI paradigm within institutions Overview by co-chairs Lena Tsiopuri (Ethniko kai Kapodistriako Panepistimio Athinon) and Tomas Rehacek (AEESTI/Ecsite)

Embedding RRI within HEI institution is a recent and complex process which has started only recently. There are different ways and priorities in each institution, which form a set of interesting possibilities to assess and learn from. Achieving the objective of changing the dominant structures, culture and practice of a HEI system requires the forces of change being exerted from the top by transposing the broader societal trends and, simultaneously, from the bottom by invoking innovative experiments in which actors create alternative practices, which eventually lead to behavioural changes. Both of these perspectives were illustrated in the panel session, which featured five examples of RRI application at HEI in Spain, Croatia and Japan. Sharing the best practice is continuously presented as an important tool in raising awareness, gaining visibility, and promoting replication and dissemination of successful, new methods and approaches. The first panel contribution submitted by the University of Catalonia, presented GenPort â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a community sourced internet portal for sharing knowledge and inspiring collaborative action on gender and science. GenPort enables the teachers and practitioners to source a myriad of practice aimed at integrating gender equality in science but also at sharing their experience and viewpoints. As such, it facilitates the exchange of experience and fosters collaboration. A different form of collaboration in RRI application came from the University Rovira i Virgili in Tarragona, Spain where learning at both, the graduate and undergraduate levels combined with social projects is carried out in the local communities. The so called Service Learning (SL) interweaves the learning process with a community service, forging a powerful tandem promoting and cultivating a sense of social responsibility by directly engaging with civil society. The success of this model is vindicated by the numbers of participants. Last year alone saw more than 760 students devoting more than 160,000 hours on social project for which they received credits. While this is a good example of a successful alternative practice putting pressure on the dominant structure, the following panel contribution from Croatia pointed out it is not all just about the content but also about the working climate. Perceptions of ethical climate and pressures in different faculties of the University of Split, Croatia, revealed a singular but also a dualistic dominant ethical climate defined by laws and professional codes; and by laws and

professional codes and self-interest respectively. While the general conclusion underscored the importance of working climate in which RRI educational interventions are delivered, the presentation also revealed that more of a top-down approach manifesting in a ‘code of conduct’ for instance, could motivate changes in individual behavior. This is a particularly challenging topic for the future of RRI and the decision to be made between relying on bottom up versus top-down. This dimension needs to be examined and make sure there is a wellthought through decision when designing a new RRI strategy. Yet, another example of RRI integration came from the University of Barcelona, Spain where a bioethics committee, which was established in 1996, was a nucleus leading to a RRI fostering tool. Covering the entire life-cycle of a research, the bioethics committee put in place several mechanisms to reduce the percentage of ethical issues and nurture RRI mindset by promoting transparency, accountability and trust. Interestingly enough, the bioethics committee also proved to be a valuable source of practices, which are now shared with the students as part of their education. Having concrete, real-world examples turned out to be a key to reducing the occurrence of malpractice, while fostering responsibility in research. It also demonstrated that bioethics and RRI are subject to all faculties and not only to medical/bio sciences. The last contribution was a presentation of a comprehensive model applied at the Osaka University, Japan, where RRI has been incorporated into postgraduate education. A two-year minor postgraduate program offered to students in natural and social science and humanities is designed to develop capacity of the students to address ethical, legal and social issues of scientific and technological research. Furthermore, the program provides ample opportunities for exchange and interaction by featuring discussion groups and interactive workshops. All in all, it stands for a cross-disciplinary learning environment based on communication and mutual understanding. Following the assessment after two years since the implementation, a review determined the program is a solid educational platform changing the HEI culture for better. In conclusion the interventions demonstrated thatRRI in HEIs is in the process of being adopted by a variety of institutions and there are different ways to proceed. From the diverse cases reported the main conclusions are:

• Both bottom up and top down approaches can work; the latter may have a more encompassing and

speedy result, if embraced by all contituents

• Gender issues and bioethics committees as being more mature, may be a good starting point for

newcomers

• For RRI to succeed in HEIs it needs (eventually) to be incorporated into the curricula

GenPORT: articulating RRI through Gender Equality in Science MĂźller, J., Arroyo, L. Gender & ICT Research Group, Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3), Open University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain

GenPORT is an EU FP7 project that consists of a community sourced internet portal for sharing knowledge and inspiring collaborative action on gender and science. The project is a useful resource for advancing responsible research and innovation in Higher Education by promoting the inclusion of a gender perspective. The portal provides information and support in the development of gender-sensitive research design, and gender-equal research structures and processes. The project covers all sciences â&#x20AC;&#x201C; natural and social sciences, and humanities. The project is a developing online community of practitioners, policy-makers and researchers working across the globe for gender equality and excellence in science, technology and innovation. The fact that the information and services are shaped by the activities and contributions of community members encourage mutual responsiveness and the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders (Von Schomberg, 2013). The information and service are constantly evolving according the uploaded contents and comments of the GenPORT users. This process of reflexivity and adaptability will allow the incorporation of the new findings and a mechanism of transparency (PellĂŠ and Reber, 2013). GenPORT also aims to facilitate the exchange of experiences and to foster collaboration, and so to support continuing policy and practical interventions in pursuit of gender equality. In this sense, the project intends to offer useful tools to produce outcomes to respond to societal challenge of equality and inclusion (European Commission, 2014).

Service Learning Programme at Universitat Rovira i Virgili: the promotion of social university responsibility Capdevila, A, Lombardi BolaĂąo, An C, Ojeta Lesaca, O Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV), Tarragona, Spain

Service Learning (SL) is an educational proposal that combines learning processes and community service in a single project, in which participants learn while working on real needs and trying to improve their environment. SL has a solid institutional framework at Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV); where it has been integrated into several strategic plans, academic normative and it also has a specific action plan, approved by the Governing Council in 2012 and updated in 2015. SL is an instrument of integral university training in which the principal objective is to train socially responsible professionals. This communication will present the URV Service Learning Programme, and also one of its most important promotion actions: the Social Projects Marketplace. This initiative, that came from international references, aims to develop students Final Projects in the context of SL Programme, and so, of University Social Responsibility. It became an instrument of Responsible Research in the frame of Undergraduate and Graduate programmes. The Social Projects Marketplace has been organized in collaboration with Reus (2014) and Tarragona (2015) City Councils. SL Programme promoters have established several reunions with local social entities, with the aim of transforming their social needs in university Final Projects. The results of these two editions are highly positive with the participation of more than fifty entities and the presentation, to students and faculty, of more than one hundred potential projects.

Is work climate important for RRI training? Cross sectional study of perceptions of ethical climate and pressures in different faculties at the University of Split, Croatia Malički, M1, Katavić, V2, Marković, D1, Marušić, M1, Marušić, A1 University of Split, School of Medicine, Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Split, Croatia

University of Zagreb, School of Medicine, Department of Anatomy, Zagreb, Croatia

Background. Teaching RRI in higher education, just as in any other type of research institution, depends not only on the content of the education but also on the overall work climate, which belongs to the so-called hidden curriculum. While ethical has been shown to influence a variety of work-related attitudes and behaviours, eg job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover rates, ethical behaviour, whistle-blowing willingness, and bullying, there are very few studies on ethical climate in academic settings. Objective. To determine the prevailing ethical climates at three different schools of a single university, and the perceived pressures young scientist experienced while working at those schools. Methods. An anonymous survey consisting of a sociodemographic information questionnaire and an ethical climate questionnaire (ECQ) was sent to all employees of the University of Split’s three schools: Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Naval Architecture; Faculty of Philosophy, and School of Medicine. In parallel, research integrity (RI) and organizational climate (OC) survey was sent to all young junior scientists, i.e. scientific fellows/research novices, at the three schools. Results. We received completed ECQ questionnaires from 131 (53%) employees of the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture (FE), 73 (46%) from the Faculty of Philosophy (FP), and 90 (47%) from the employees of the School of Medicine (SM), as well as 40 (87%) completed RI&OS questionnaires of scientific fellows from FE, 13 (87%) from FP, and 17 (81%) from SM. The dominant ethical climate type perceived at FE and FP was ‘Laws and professional codes’ type (ECQ=13.0, 95%CI 12.3 – 13.7 and ECQ=13.4 95%CI 12.4- 14.4, respectively) while SM had a dual climate of ‘Laws and professional codes’ and ‘Self–interest’ types (ECQ=12.0, 95%CI 11.2 – 12.8, and ECQ=13.1 95% CI 12.3 – 13.8). Scientific fellows belonging to the three schools did not differ in their perceptions of organizational climate, or in their perceived individual, group or organizational pressures. Conclusion. When planning RRI educational interventions, it is important to keep in mind the environment in which these interventions are delivered.

Integrating RRI through ethics committees at university level. From reviewing to teaching and capacity building De Lecuona, I Bioethics and Law Observatory UNESCO Chair in Bioethics at the University of Barcelona

The bioethics commission at the University of Barcelona established in 1996 and its network of spanish universities and research centres ethics committees, established in 2000 have become for fostering RRI with and for society. Two tools that are models for being replied at LERU level and at UNESCO Bioethics NNUU. It is an ongoing project that deals with the challenge of integrating RRI in research an innovation from the start, from the inception of research to its impact in society. It is about promoting transparency, accountability and trust in society, with an anticipatory role. It is not only about promoting research integrity at university level within students and predoctoral and postdoctoral researchers and its mentors. It goes beyond. From reviewing research protocols to promoting good practices in research and integrating in a transversal way the key issues of RRI. In this sense the bioethics commissions at university level could develop a leading role in teaching RRI and connecting with society. It is about innovating in teaching and capacity building in ethics, in gender, avoiding malpractices and fostering responsibility at university level. This is possible through an internet site where researchers and society could have open access to the information about how research works, in terms of methodological but also ethical, legal and social aspects and at the same time, and here is the teaching innovation, they are invited before presenting their research protocols to learn from lessons and cases that are converted into communiquĂŠs in order to deal i.e. with authorship, ethical issues of thesis, participation of students in research, big data, social sciences and humanities research. Its virtue relies in its capability of promoting good practices, trust and its flexibility because there is no need to create new infraestructures to implement RRI. The proposed paper will discuss the process of developing the one-day interactive workshop on research integrity, the training format that resulted from the train-the-trainer approach as well as the first try-out sessions and the evaluation of the sessions.

Potential and Challenges of Implementing RRI Postgraduate Education: A Case from Japan Kudo, M., Hirakawa, H., Yagi, E., Kamisato, T., Tsujita, T., Watanabe, H., Yamanouchi, Y., Kobayashi, T. Center for the Study of Communication-Design, Osaka University, Japan

In the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake and consequent nuclear accidents in Fukushima in March 2011, the government launched several initiatives to promote evidence-based policy making in scientific and technological governance. It was in this context that the Program for Education and Research on Science and Technology in Public Sphere (STiPS) was established jointly by Osaka University and Kyoto University in 2012, with a core objective to develop capacity of students to address ethical, legal and social issues of scientific and technological research in both policy making and actual research conduct. One of the major characteristics of STiPS is that it is a two years sub-major postgraduate programme, which enables students specialising in natural and social sciences and humanities for their degrees to study together in the programme. Another important characteristics is the active use of discussion groups and interactive workshops, particularly on themes of science and technology which are at issue. In so doing, STiPS delivers a highly cross-disciplinary learning environment where students bring their own expertise into the discussion not only to challenge and question each other, but also to learn from each other different ways of approaching science-society relations. Two years on, results of exit surveys and the governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s review of the programme have indicated that STiPS works as a solid educational platform where students can develop their interest in and capacity for handling challenges at the intersection of science, society and politics. At the same time, we also have identified various challenges embraced by both students and staff members regarding coordination of cross-disciplinary courses, the career path of graduates and programme sustainability. In this presentation, we will examine our experience of running STiPS, with a focus on its institutional framework, key educational contents, international linkage and existing challenges.

Poster Panel Hypatia Project: a gender sensitive framework to put in practice gender inclusiveness in STEM Achiam, M1, Holmegaar, H1, Troncoso, A2 1

University of Copenhagen (UCPH)

Ecsite

Hypatia is a new EU Horizon 2020-funded project that addresses the challenge of gathering different societal actors around bringing more teenage girls into STEM careers, and changing the way sciences are communicated to young people in and out of school, in a more gender inclusive way. To achieve this, we collaborate intensively with schools, industry, museums and policy makers. We aim to empower different stakeholders, promote inclusive gender education, engage each community of actors, collaborate with them, ensure legacy of our actions and create new ways of promoting equity in science education. The University of Copenhagen is developing a theoretical framework, based on a number of recent EU projects that have focused on the issue of gender and STEM education, and building on these initiatives as well as recent research, proposing a framework to address gender inclusion in STEM activities. This framework encompasses a number of levels (individual, interactional, institutional, and societal/cultural) and guides inquiries into how conditions and constraints at these levels shape STEM activities in various ways to include (or exclude) various types of learners. The framework gives rise to a set of criteria for the analysis of the gender inclusiveness in existing STEM education activities, or for the design new, gender inclusive activities. We will produce: • A toolkit: An accessible, practical and ready to be used digital collection of modules, that consists of activities such as short workshops, programmes, accompanied with guidelines on how to use them in a gender inclusive way. The modules will be aimed at teenagers and will be used and implemented by teachers, informal learning organisations, researchers and industry. • National Hubs: hubs are compiled in 14 countries and they will be led by science centres and museums. They link stakeholders (industries, teachers, policy makers) and teenagers. • Events: they will take place in 14 countries, in science centres and museums and will specifically focus on engaging teenagers in the variety of future careers. • Dissemination: An institutional campaign and a campaign targeting teenagers will be taking place.

Learning Skills: how far away are businessmen and graduates? Duque, L1, Pujol-Jover, M2, Riera-Prunera, M C3 1

Universidad Carlos III, Madrid, Spain

Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

By means of a case of study, we analyse the relationship between the skills developed by graduates at university and those that labour market demands. Inspired on the SERVQUAL model, we adapt a gap model comparing businessmen’ and graduates’ perceptions of required and acquired competences. We analysed the discrepancies corresponding to 30 competences grouped into three sets: instrumental, interpersonal and professional skills. The differences between firms’ and recent graduates’ opinions tell us that (i) graduates are not taught the specific knowledge that apparently would be useful in the immediate future to successfully join the labour market (gap A); and (ii) the graduates seem to lack self-esteem and self-confidence in their abilities and knowledge (gap B). An interesting finding is the fact that both employers’ and graduates’ perceptions of required competences at work seem to work in the same direction (gap C). This fact, graduates being closer to labour market demands rather than to acquiring a solid and general knowledge, is nothing but a direct consequence of being keen on their tasks and requirements at work and thus behave practical. We are highly convinced of the need to seek after a rapprochement between academia and businessmen, where university in particular and society in general turn their steps towards the boosting of all those skills and abilities that will help future workers to adapt to new situations, improving their capability of learning, taking on responsibilities and being able to take decisions. This will require that university continues to advance in the proposal and implementation of teaching methods aimed at increasing the weight given to practical lectures centred on the implementation of discussion, communication and negotiation activities and to foster an active role of graduates. This work also requires some institutional support, denoting that it should provide a context favourable to the achievement of these objectives, modifying, when necessary, curricula and methodologies encouraging more active and demanding learning methods.

Female Entrepreunership in Europe and an example of the WINGS project designed for its support Klucznik-Tӧrő, A1, Mahajan, L2, Castello, V3, Guerrero, J4 International Center for Entrepreneurship, Poland

1 2

FH JOANNEUM Gesellschaft mbH, Austria

Programma integra, Italy

INCOMA, Spain

WINGS is an international project, which started its activity in January 2014 and for a period of three years is co-financed by the European Commission. Its main aim is to unite initiatives undertaken by female entrepreneurs as well as to create a strong, recognisable and sustainable European-wide network of those who support of, or are engaged in, female entrepreneurial activities. WINGS involves consortium of nine partners – both higher education institutions and private firms. Moreover, 35 organizations have been actively involved in the project and became associated partners of the project. The outcomes of WINGS includes: −Collection of good practices about educational and training projects with similar to WINGS scopes. It was done in order to give female entrepreneurs an overview of existing EU as well as nationally and regionally funded projects and networks that support female entrepreneurship. Altogether 241 projects were pre-selected and analysed. Each of the selected practices were rated on transparent and justifiable criteria to ensure the highest impact and usefulness for female entrepreneurs. They all, besides focusing on female entrepreneurship, had to promote supportive ICT systems for learning and training across a variety of topics. Female entrepreneurs are free to look up initiatives in their preferred country and get in touch with them to explore co-operation and possibilities for getting a support. −Internet-based platform www.wings-network.eu prepared for satisfying diversified needs of various groups of WINGS beneficiaries that is:

o Stakeholders providing mentoring, o Female entrepreneurs that may receive mentoring, o Actual and potential female entrepreneurs who look for training materials, o Those who look for inspirations and examples of successful female entrepreneurs, o Those who look for the interaction with other female entrepreneurs, o Female entrepreneurs who would like to present their products or services via WINGS web-shop.

−A Diversity Report has been also developed to analyse the special needs and situation of migrant women regarding the self-employment as a tool for social and labour integration with a particular focus on the existing tools to promote migrant entrepreneurship in different EU countries. −Regular events and roundtables are being organized to bring both experienced and aspiring female entrepreneurs together, creating possibilities to network and learn. These events are open to the public and take place in different countries across Europe to reach and involve as many participant as possible. The target is not only to reach female entrepreneurs but also students and HEIs staff as well as supporters of entrepreneurship – chambers of commerce and incubators of entrepreneurship.

Incorporating Service Learning in Business and Economics Education Setó-Pamies, D1, and Bové-Sans, M A2 1

Department of Business Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Reus, Spain

Department of Economics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Reus, Spain

Service-Learning (SL) is a form of experiential education in which students engage in activities that address human and community needs together with structured opportunities intentionally designed to promote student learning and development. SL is an educational approach integrating community service with intentional learning activities. Students, educators, and communities build partnerships to learn from each other while working together to strengthen individuals, communities and society. In this regard, SL fits perfectly in the context of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) at higher university. Although SL is an instructional method that has garnered widespread acceptance in higher education and it is used widely throughout most academic disciplines, the current state of SL pedagogies in Business and Economics education is just beginning. So, our work focuses on the SL experiences in Business and Economics education in order to contribute to development of this learning approach in this academic discipline. The main purpose of our study is, firstly, to identify the service-learning practices carried out at the Faculty of Business and Economics in the Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV) case; and secondly, to explore the main factors that have contributed to its development. Our study analyses how service-learning is integrated into higher education curriculum, taking into account the nature and content of the courses in which this methodology is used. The results of our research show that SL methodology is embedded primarily in the course that corresponds to the degree final project, where students voluntarily choose this option. Our results also show a dramatic increase in SL practices in the Faculty of Business and Economics from the first experience. The factors that have played a major role in this development are: 1) the incorporation of one professor to the “URV-SL network”, 2) conducting a workshop for teachers to explain how the SL methodology can be incorporated into their courses; 3) the realization of a marketplace for social projects that allows contacting social organizations, teachers and students.

Studio-based teaching-learning tool as a RRI methodology within the design of water bottles Achiam, Soares, T1, Seco, P2 Product Design Master’s Degree student, ESAD-College of Art and Design, Portugal

ESAD-College of Art and Design, Portugal

This project presents the result of the commitment between a lecturer and a student from ESAD - College of Art and Design, and was submitted to a design contest promoted by Águas do Porto. The strategic objective of the contest was to change consumer behaviour to increase tap water consumption and improve the quality of water distribution in the Porto city. One of the goals of the sponsor was to inform, increase tap water value, consumption and enhance confidence on high quality of public water. Within the contest, two bottles were to be designed and the sponsor requirements should include the awardwinning brand image of “Porto.” The project was developed through a studio-based pedagogy methodology – that is “a method for cultivating students’ identities as designers, developing their conceptual understanding of design and the design process, and fostering their design thinking” (Kuhn, 2001). The bottles designed respond to demands of a social and culturally heterogeneous public and mainly to portability issues – a recyclable plastic bottle of 0.5l and a bottle of 1.5l to promote the use of tap water. The different needs of potential users of the 0,5l bottle demanded: - to drink water in informal situations, directly from the bottle: lid that can be opened/closed by threading; - for inclusive users, for children, handicapped or blind people: a straw that can be used through a second lid and a texture that indicates the opening point; - to drink water from another container in order to avoid mouth-bottle contact: a cup was designed and fixed to the bottle. This project is an example of good practice in an higher education environment and innovative and responsible design for society

Enhancing Responsible Research and Innovation through Curricula in Higher education Tassone V, Eppink H Education and Competence Studies, Wageningen University, The Netherlands

In this paper we argue, in line with other authors (e.g. Adam and Groves 2011; Grinbaum and Groves, 2013; Owen et al, 2013; Stilgoe, et al, 2013), that the challenges of our time require a broader notion of responsibility, such as a prospective notion, that matches the complex society of today, that accommodates the limitation of knowledge, that allows for a deeper reflection about ways of doing and being and for the cultivation of social values and virtues. From a prospective perspective responsibility can be approached as care and responsiveness. Additionally, the urgency and severity of our grand challenges call for overcoming any sense of paralysis that can be experienced as a result of some factual limitations of an accountability-based approach. Consequently our proposed working definition of RRI in higher education is grounded on a prospective notion of responsibility, without excluding elements deriving from a consequentialist notion. Based on this, the working definition we propose is the following: â&#x20AC;&#x153;Fostering RRI through higher education curricula is about inspiring and equipping learners to collectively care for the future by means of responsive stewardship of scientific and innovation practices that are ethically acceptable, sustainable and socially desirableâ&#x20AC;?. Following up on the aforementioned working definition of RRI in higher education, we provide a preliminary RRI competence framework. For the formulation of the RRI competence framework we did a literature study on RRI with an eye on the capabilities needed for fostering RRI. By means of qualitative content analysis we (i.e. the two authors), first separately and then jointly, have interpreted and coded text from Stilgoe, et al. (2013, p. 1570-1573) describing the RRI dimensions as well as text from the RRI Tools Project (RRI tools project D1.4 Kupper et. al., 2015, p. 19-38) discussing the RRI process requirements. Based on this analysis and by taking into account our proposed working definition of RRI in higher education we have made a first selection of a preliminary set of competencies that constitutes the RRI competence. Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of this preliminary framework including the RRI competence and related set of competencies. We have divided those preliminary competencies into four dimensions based on the process dimensions described by Stilgoe (2013) namely anticipation, reflexivity, inclusiveness and responsiveness. In the full paper we offer a description of those preliminary set of competencies. While each of the proposed competencies stands on its own and within the related dimension, those competencies and dimensions are interlinked. The lines between them are blurred. We consider that those various competencies can mutual reinforce each other, even when they appear to be overlapping or in contradictions within and across dimensions, and that it is the dynamic interaction among them that supports building the overarching and multi-dimensional RRI competence and that thus enables RRI. Additionally, it needs to be clarified that the RRI competence framework is merely meant as a guide for RRI educators and practitioners. The framework is a conceptual framework built considering that RRI is a complex matter that can be related to diverse actors and contexts (e.g. diverse cultures, diverse grand challenges, diverse scientific and innovation fields and outcomes). The proposed RRI competence, and related set of competencies, embraces this complexity and diversity. As such, it is context-independent. So, while using the framework as a guide, educators and practitioners are invited to personalize its application within the reality and relational context they are in.

Sparks project: how to effectively communicate RRI to citizens? Troncoso, A, Zolotonosa, M Ecsite, European Network of Science Centres and Museums

How can we communicate RRI to citizens in Europe? How can we make sure this complex concept is understood? How can we encourage citizens to have an active position when it comes to science and innovation? The new EU Sparks project is aiming to address these challenges. Sparks is an ambitious engagement project on the topic of technology shifts in health and medicine. Its aim is to raise awareness and communicate the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) to citizens in 29 European countries. Sparks will organise an interactive touring exhibition and 230 innovative participatory activities such as science cafés, pop-up science shops, incubation activities and scenario workshops. Creative disruptions —in the form of artistic inputs and questioning— will help it to engage more stakeholders. The European dimension of the project is paired with a strong emphasis on local implementation through 29 experienced science communicators that will adapt the exhibition and activities to their contexts and establish local multi-stakeholder collaborative partnerships. Sparks’ methodology emphasises interdisciplinary (science, art, policy, industry, research, science education) and participatory approaches to promote RRI in relation to health. The project will also have a learning and policy component. Data will be gathered from visitors of the exhibition in order to further build the capacity of science actors and policy makers to promote RRI and better understand society’s vision, interests and readiness concerning RRI in health. Sparks will use various levels of interaction and engagement (physical as well as virtual, including social media) to inform a very large number of stakeholders on the relevance of RRI and promote collective stewardship of research activities to the benefit of society.

Walking the city: social interactions in learning through the urban environment Aquilué, I1, Gomes, R2, Roca, E1 1

Departament d’Urbanisme i Ordenació del Territori, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

Departament d’Expressió Gràfica Arquitectònica I, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

The inclusion and the updating of the anthropological and urban studies carried out by Kevin Lynch and Jane Jacobs in the sixties has facilitated the project Walking the City, which aims to promote the active perception and the profound assimilation of urban experiences in the field of teaching urbanism. The city is perceived through critical eyes, dynamic explanations and on-site debates to discover the added value of urban environments that usually remains hidden. This research and teaching project has been developed since 2004, and year after year it has generated a broad background enriched by contributions from a great number of social agents, who have consolidated it as a singular academic experience in the Barcelona School of Architecture. Walking the City intends to develop new forms of understanding the city and its elements by incorporating interactions with social agents and professionals who have defined and are part of it. In short, its principal aim focuses on integrating the knowledge about Barcelona, moving the learning process from the classroom to the real urban space. The project analyses the interaction between the adjacent culture in Barcelona and the culture which students provide from their knowledge and previous urban experience they have gained in their hometowns. Barcelona appears as an urban laboratory analysed from three different perspectives: the morphological, related with urban form, architectural design and open spaces; the social, produced by the anthropological observation carried out by agents who belong to the social system of the city; and finally the cultural, analysed from student’s pluralistic perspectives. The methodology to conduct the project concentrates on three innovative bases in the field of teaching urbanism. The first basis is the guided routes around diverse urban areas of Barcelona, the second is the interpretation of urban experiences using graphic reports and the third is the introduction of ICT systems, which allow debates on the virtual platforms created as an essential tool for the project.

Introducing research ethics and bioethics into biosciences curricula at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Bogonez, E, Carrascosa, J M Department of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

The framework for qualifications of the European Higher Education Space incorporates as educational goals “to have the ability to gather and interpret relevant data to inform judgements that include reflection on relevant social, scientific or ethical issues”. We present our experience on the implementation of these goals into biosciences curricula at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM). Undergraduates of the Biochemistry Degree at the UAM are required to take a 6 ECTS fourth level course, Biochemistry and Society, which includes a module introducing scientific ethics and bioethics. To promote the reflection on responsible conduct in research and to get students aware of the current problems and ethical dilemmas resulting from the progress in biochemistry and molecular biology, we have used two student-centered formative activities: i) reading assignments on practical cases, followed by in-class discussion and debate, i.e. treatment of data, publication of results, intellectual property, conflict of interest, use of genetically modified organisms and big data ethics, among others; and ii) a format free group work (review, video, blog, wiki page) on some relevant issues related to research ethics and bioethics and to science communication. The Master in Molecular Biomedicine at the UAM offers Animal Experimentation and Bioethics, an elective subject that has a strong focus on issues related to legislation on animal use in experimental research in accordance to Spanish and European guidelines. In addition, general research bioethics and institutionalized bioethics (Bioethics Committees, national legislation, international documents and agreements, etc.) are addressed in lectures, group works and classroom debates. Many students recognized they were confronted for the first time with some ethical and bioethical dilemmas, and highly valued their incorporation into the curriculum. Our next objectives will be to develop more effective teaching strategies that foster student skills in the analysis and reasoning of specific ethical issues, as well as appropriate assessment procedures to evaluate their learning outcomes.

Experiencing of learning Catalan pronunciation learning the new website Catalan Pronunciation Guides: from self-learning to peer-learning Carrera-Sabaté, J. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Oral language is becoming more and more important in the current society due to the transcendence of human relationship and audio-visual profusion. Catalan University offers programs to work with oral skills but there is a lack of attention to an important part of the oral language: the pronunciation. As Catalonia is a multilingual land, it is important to provide to students and, at last, society, with new ways of learning Catalan pronunciation. Apart from that, the freedom of the individuals to learn and self- manage, to find what they need and to adapt it to their environment is becoming a common practice (http://www.surf.nl/en/publicaties/Documents/ SURF%20magazines%20English/SURF03%20UK%20September%202012.pdf). Its advantages are: a greater motivation within the learners, encouraging of the process of individual learning and a dynamic, interactive access to the information. In 2010 the University of Barcelona’s FONCAT Pedagogical Innovation Group has initiated the creation of a website (“Catalan Pronunciation Guide” http://www.ub.edu/guiesdepronunciacio) for speakers who need guidelines to self-learning Catalan pronunciation. The website has been used by several students studying for Communication degrees yielding great success (see Carrera-Sabaté et al. 2014) and is currently used by Catalan linguist students to introduce peer learning to students studying for Communication degrees with Catalan pronunciation problems. It is a collaborative work in which both sides benefit from peer-assessment. The goal of this paper is: 1) to present some reflections on the process of self-learning Catalan pronunciation, 2) to describe the website: “Catalan pronunciation guides”, and 3) to discuss the current experience of peerlearning Catalan pronunciation.

Learning engineering without avoiding the “what for” question Basart, J M1, Farrús, M2, Florensa, A3, Mariño, J B4, Nadeu, C4, Serra, M5 1

Engineering School, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

N-RAS Research Center, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona

IQS School of Engineering, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona

TALP Research Center, Department of Signal Processing and Communications, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona

4 5

Computer Science, Department of Telecommunication and Multimedia , Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona

In our engineering schools, students mostly learn the inner side of technology, that is, they learn to “know how” technical problems can be solved. The question about the meaning, the “what for”, of technologies scarcely appears in teaching activities, and when it does, it usually is in the framework of economy. However, engineering students are first of all human beings and citizens; and technology (technoscience) is intrinsically related to society and culture. Therefore, the development of an engineering education should be done within a broader context, which includes socio-human disciplines and applied ethics. All the co-authors of this contribution have some experience about that kind of broad-context teaching at different universities, mainly through specific courses, either optional or not for students. As the “what for” question is a matter of opinion, the course tasks are designed to foster a strong student participation and interrelationship. A case-study, team-working, and role-playing methodology is used, allowing students to dialog and also to debate with confronted views; even some classroom tasks are led by the students themselves. In this way, they are also able to practice and further develop their argumentation capacity and their communication skills. In our view, the involvement, both cognitive and emotional, of the students in the course activities plays a key role in enhancing their awareness and sense of responsibility regarding the social and environmental implications of technology, and hopefully in their development of other related attitudes and values. We have learnt, both from class observation and polls, how that is favored by the case-study method, either through stories or movies. In conclusion, we think that both the presence of fully dedicated courses in the curricula and the realization of learning activities in technical courses are useful for dealing with the “what for” of technology in engineering studies.