College Student Activism on Campus

This chapter provides an overview of the definition of activism, highlighting the current national context for how activism is implemented and perceived, and then exploring how colleges and universities have begun to manage student activism, primarily in the interest of learning, but also in relation to risk management. The concept of managed activism tied to learning is explored against the background of college student development, and is also tied to public and institutional policy. The chapter concludes with a preface to the remainder of the book, noting the inter-relationship between activism and the larger world both on and off campus.

Institutional Review Board (IRB) Shopping- Accessible for Public Comment

Context: IRB Forum Shopping is an under-researched yet highly-relevant ethical issue in the context of clinical research. IRB members review the proposed research methods to ensure the ethical principles. The IRB has the authority to approve or disapprove the research proposals that fall within the institutional policy and adheres to SOP (Standard Operating Procedures). When the research project has obtained an unfavorable or conditional IRB review, the researcher bypass the process of addressing the IRB’s decision by deserting the IRB and selecting another forum that will provide favorable review. Currently, proposed regulations to prohibit IRB shopping are available for public comment. The FDA report made clear that no empirical evidence exists to support the widespread of IRB shopping.

Science-technology links for the conservation of university historical documentation

This article focuses on a series of problems that threaten the preservation and use of university heritage, especially documentary. Various aspects such as the non-observance of the legislation, the absence of an efficient institutional policy, affectations caused by lack of knowledge and personnel, the high cost of the technologies and materials necessary for conservation and restoration and the evident impact of antiquity affect its conservation. Taking these precedents into account, the different uses derived from the management of university documentary heritage in its links with science and technology are analyzed. From the methodological field, an analysis was carried out with a qualitative approach based on the bibliographic review method and the selection of information through inclusion and exclusion criteria of primary and secondary sources in which a perspective of science-technology studies prevailed. and society. The main results make it possible to identify the necessary introduction of technology to facilitate preventive conservation, cataloging and dissemination of documentary heritage and everything that derives from it in research matters. Likewise, with the implementation of a responsible management of documentary heritage, it is necessary to involve various social actors and institutions to promote scientific research based on the management and dissemination of knowledge as a significant resource.

Da Ruptura à Releitura: transformações nos Direitos Humanos no Brasil dos anos 2010

In this paper, I propose an analysis of the 2010s in Brazil based on two events that took place in the field of Human Rights in the country: the election of deputy Marco Feliciano for the presidency of the Federal Chamber's Human Rights and Minorities Commission (CDHM), in 2013 and the creation, in 2019, of the Ministry of Women, Family and Human Rights (MMFDH) under the command of Damares Alves. The two facts, read respectively as rupture and re-reading, disclose a correlation of forces that suggests how the Human Rights agenda legitimizes and enhances a given religious agency in the current national political scenario. This scenario, I argue, becomes viable from the discourse against the “gender ideology” in the field of institutional policy in the country, which supported the deepl changes that took place in the course of that decade.

Case Report: Scientific Dissemination as a Mediator of the Research Consolidation Process: Proposals for Institutionalization

Introduction Communicating science is one of the main steps in the research process. However, the method of communication must be aligned with the audience for the message. This is especially evident in institutions that promote teaching, research, and extension, especially when considering joint actions that promote a dialogue between themselves and the community. Methods In light of this need, this study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the main documents guiding the policies and institutional actions related to research at the two federal institutes based in the state of Goiás/Brazil: Institution A and Institution B and proposing ways to include scientific dissemination as a mediator of the research consolidation process. This is a bibliographic, documentary study with a descriptive, qualitative approach based on a case study. Results and Discussion The analyses indicate that research must be consolidated as institutional policy and that a policy to encourage research must be implemented. This has yet to be achieved at these institutions, although scientific dissemination is explicitly addressed by institutional documents guiding the development and dissemination of pedagogical practices, especially in teaching and extension. Scientific journalism and scientific dissemination are mediators and facilitators of this endeavor.

Digital academic dishonesty: A socio-psychological analysis

Introduction. The article presents a review of psychological studies aimed at analyzing digital academic dishonesty (academic misconduct with the use of the Internet). The socio-psychological specifics of digital academic dishonesty, which distinguishes it from traditional forms of academic dishonesty, have been studied quite fragmentally to date. The purpose of this study is to identify socio-psychological factors that determine the involvement of students in digital academic dishonesty in terms of digitalization of education. Materials and Methods. In order to achieve the research goal, we used the method of systematic review of research articles published in 1995-2021 and indexed in the databases ‘Scopus’ and ‘Web of Science’. According to the criteria (relevant keywords; availability of a detailed description of the research program, empirical results; Russian or English), 55 articles were included in the final array of analysis. Results. We identified individual-psychological and contextual-environmental factors of digital academic dishonesty. Individual psychological factors include: students’ attitudes towards digital academic dishonesty; students’ academic experience; students’ personal characteristics; socio-demographic characteristics of students. Contextual and environmental factors include: students’ attitude to the prevalence of digital academic dishonesty among peers; teachers’ attitude to digital academic dishonesty; institutional policy on digital academic dishonesty. Conclusions. The authors conclude that the socio-psychological risk factors for involving schoolchildren and students in digital academic dishonesty are their previous experience of academic dishonesty, the idea of the acceptability of this form of academic behavior, the lack of educational motivation and self-regulation, insufficient level of knowledge and information competence (individual psychological factors), as well as the prevalence of digital academic dishonesty in an educational institution with the background of the lack of an institutional policy to prevent digital academic dishonesty and relevant actions of teachers (contextual and environmental factors).

Rapid, centralised decision-making in a higher education emergency

Purpose This study aims to explain the primacy that rapid, centralised decision-making gained in higher education institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a particular focus on Australian universities. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on discussions regarding policy problems of an international, purpose-convened on-line policy network involving over 100 registrations from multiple countries. It analyses emerging institutional policy governance texts and documents shared between network participants, applies policy science literature regarding traditional institutional policy-making routines and rapid decision-making, and references media reportage from 2020. The paper traces how higher education institutions rapidly adjusted to pandemic conditions and largely on-line operations. Findings The study finds that higher education institutions responded to the COVID-19 crisis by operationalising emergency management plans and introducing rapid, centralised decision-making to transition to remote modes of operation, learning and research under state-imposed emergency conditions. It highlights the need to ensure robust governance models recognising the ascendance of emergency decision-making and small-p policies in such circumstances, notwithstanding longstanding traditions of extended collegial policy-making routines for big-P (institutional) Policy. The pandemic highlighted practice and policy problems subject to rapid reform and forced institutions to clarify the relationship between emergency planning and decision-making, quality and institutional policy. Practical implications In covering a range of institutional responses, the study advances the possibility of institutions planning better for unexpected, punctuated policy shifts during an emergency through the incorporation of rapid decision-making in traditionally collegial environments. At the same time, the paper cautions against the normalisation of such processes. The study also highlights key practices and policies that require urgent reconsideration in an emergency. The study is designed as a self-contained and freestanding narrative to inform responses to future emergencies by roundly addressing the particularities of the 2020 phase of the COVID-19 pandemic as it affected higher education. Originality/value There is only limited research on policy-making in higher education institutions. This research offers an original contribution on institutional policy-making during a prolonged emergency that deeply changed higher education institution’s governance, operations and outlook. Particularly significant is the synthesis of experiences from a wide range of sector personnel, documenting punctuated policy shifts in policy governance (meta-policy), institutional policy-making routines and quality assurance actions under great pressure. This paper is substantially developed from a paper given at the Association for Tertiary Education Management Institutional Policy Seminar, 26th October 2020.

Make the Interview Work for You

In conducting the interview, researchers should decide who will participate; while journalists generally do not like having a public information officer (PIO) sit in, institutional policy might require it. A PIO can, in fact, contribute to an interview’s success, for example, by bringing up points otherwise missed. The researcher should also understand how or whether to go off the record. Strategies for being interviewed include understanding the journalist’s level of understanding and the nature of their medium. Interviews should avoid technical terms and equations; they should also repeat key points, avoid hype, explain controversies fairly, and make conflicts of interest clear. The researcher can manage questions to avoid pitfalls and improve the outcome of the interview. The researcher should be prepared to supply additional information. A scientist’s style can also be important in an interview—for example, relating personal stories and being enthusiastic and even humorous. Follow-up can include an email to the journalists emphasizing important points, or those neglected. Radio and TV interviews involve special preparation, given they are audio and visual media; news conferences also require a special strategy.

Protect Yourself from Communication Traps

For all the benefits of communicating research, there are also pitfalls. A researcher might be misquoted or accused of hogging the credit or hiding corporate ties. They might also find themselves swamped in the tidal wave of a hyperstory that feeds on itself ad infinitum. Or, the researcher might have to decide whether to tiptoe through a delicate story. All these exigencies require preparation and planning, which can be especially productive when done with a public information officer. Researchers should monitor their reputation on social media and take steps to avoid being misquoted or misinterpreted. They should also make sure they know when they are on the record when talking to journalists, to give proper credit to collaborators, and to publicly go against institutional policy. They should disclose corporate ties. In the case of a controversy or crisis, scientists should work with their public information officer to create effective communications.