Supporting RRI: Developing RRI Guidelines for PhD Candidates
Building on basic RRI literature and in-class discussions, students will develop responsibility guidelines for their academic setting (and potentially for their respective discipline), which are viable for the students’ further PhD research.
EHEA: Third cycle
EQF level: 8
Year of study
This training programme does not have a determined year of study. At best, however, students should attend this course at the beginning of their PhD training and before they start their research projects.
Learning outcomes (LO)
On completion of this course students will be able to:
- identify possibilities to promote Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) given their own position in research and innovation (R&I) processes and institutional structures;
- develop and formulate RRI guidelines for PhD candidates within their field;
- and to deliberate on how to implement RRI into their own research projects.
Assessment methods and criteria
The assessment of the students’ performance will be based on the quality of:
- the preparation of RRI-related texts;
- the active participation in the group work and in plenary discussions;
- and a short reflection essay on the feasibility of the developed RRI guidelines for PhD researchers for the respective student’s own research project.
Prerequisites and co-requisites
Students need to have reached the required qualification to enrol into a PhD programme.
Mode of delivery
This short PhD course is a discussion-based workshop of five to six hours in-class time. Applying a flipped classroom principle, students have to prepare basic RRI literature to be used in class. Attendance and active participation in the workshop are necessary for the students’ assessment.
Planned learning activities and teaching methods
This course combines a set of learning activities and teaching methods: Employing a flipped classroom model, students have to prepare questions on RRI literature that will then be discussed in class. The workshop itself is mostly discussion-based, and work takes place in small to medium-sized groups or in the plenary. The concrete work on the guidelines is more productively done in small groups, while the suggestions and results are discussed in the plenary to reach agreement among all participants. Short presentations by each of the small groups are necessary to share the content of the work done. Concluding their experiences in the workshop, students have to reflect on.