No abstract

Fostering innovation and creativity is a priority in the science and education policy agenda of most countries, which have advocated that innovative minds and processes will boost scientific and economic growth. While our knowledge society has embraced this view, fostering creativity is among the major challenges faced by educators and policymakers. For example, plagiarism, which may be considered a form of imitation and repetition, is a global concern at schools and universities. However, most discussions focus on academic integrity, which, we believe, leaves some gaps in the approach to the problem. As part of an ongoing project on plagiarism, science and education policy, we show results from a survey sent to 143 high-school science teachers at one of the most highly regarded federal schools in Brazil. Among respondents (n=42), about 50% admit that students plagiarize in assignments. Additionally, many of these educators suggest that the way biology, chemistry and physics are taught at school stimulates more repetition than creativity. Our findings are consistent with the need for a broader perspective on plagiarism and with initiatives to stimulate creativity and critical thinking among students. Although we offer a perspective from Brazil, it may illuminate current discussions on plagiarism, particularly in emerging countries.

. The World Conferences were established as global forums for discussion of ideas, policies and empirical findings related to the responsible conduct of research. The Conferences aim to galvanise the global effort to strengthen the trustworthiness and reliability of research and encourage researchers worldwide to be accountable for their findings. Earlier conferences were held in Lisbon (2007), Singapore (2010) and Montréal (2010). The Rio conference attracted over 470 delegates from 42 countries, including leaders of research institutions and funding agencies, policy makers, editors and publishers, legal experts, researchers and graduate students. The theme of the conference was Research Rewards and Integrity: Improving Systems to Promote Responsible Research. These Proceedings contain the abstracts of the presentations given at the 4th World Conference in concurrent sessions, partner symposia, and poster sessions. Also included are summaries of the discussions in three focus tracks, which allowed delegates to consider and work on questions about the roles of funders, institutions, and countries in improving research systems and strengthening research integrity. Videos of the plenary presentations are available at the conference website (www.wcri2015.org). The 5 th World Conference will be held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, May 28-31, 2017 (www.wcri2017.org). The University of Queensland (UQ) is one of the leading research-intensive universities in Australia. UQ first developed formal policy and procedure relating to responsible conduct of research in 2011. The ongoing practical application of the first iteration of these policies identified lack of clarity in procedure with challenges arising from unintended consequences. A significant case of research misconduct in 2013 was a catalyst to commission a comprehensive external review of policy, procedure and practice relevant to research integrity, ethics and compliance in line with the Australian Code for Responsible Conduct of Research (2007). This presentation will describe the comprehensive strategy arising from this review to improve our policies, our resources, our systems and to ensure the practice of responsible conduct of research sits at the heart of UQ. Additional funds have enabled us to increase the number and seniority of staff in the Research Integrity Office, to purchase a purpose built complaints management system and the Epigeum online Research Integrity training tool. With a team of experienced research leaders and other key staff we are revising our responsible research policies and developing an education and communication plan to ensure senior staff such as Executive Deans and Heads of Schools are confident in working collaboratively with the Research Integrity Office and that all staff understand their responsibilities under the Australian Code and university policy. We have appointed a team of 16 senior researchers to the roles of Research Integrity Advisors embedded within each Faculty and Institute as a first triage point for people wi...

When it comes to ownership of ideas in science, Robert K. Merton (1957) observed in Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science that "what is true of physics, chemistry, astronomy, medicine and mathematics is true also of all the other scientific disciplines, not excluding the social and psychological sciences". However, consensus over related issues, such as what constitutes plagiarism in these fields cannot be taken for granted. We conducted a comprehensive study on plagiarism views among PhD holders registered in the database of the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). We collected 25,157 valid responses encompassing views and attitudes toward plagiarism from a probability sample of PhD holders across the fields, including biologists, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers as well as linguists, philosophers and anthropologists. The results suggest that core principles about plagiarism are shared among this multidisciplinary community and that they corroborate Merton's observations. Before this study, we could only speculate that this is the case. With these data from a probability sample of Brazilian academia (PhD holders), this study offers insight into the way plagiarism is perceived across the sciences, including the literature and arts, and sheds light on the problem in the context of international collaborative research networks. The data focus on a young research system in Latin America, but, given the cultural similarities that bind most Latin-American nations, these results may be relevant to other PhD populations in the region and should provide a comparison with studies from other emerging, non-Anglophone regions.American (LA) region, little is known about plagiarism per se in the research arena. Among the few analyses focusing on the publication system, one study that looked at the main Latin American databases SciELO and LILACS (25) shows that plagiarism accounts for the highest percentage of retractions: 86% of retraction notices in journals not listed by Journal Citation Reports (JCR) and 43% in JCR journals, from 2008 to 2014. These percentages are much higher than those usually found in similar studies for the Web of . Whether this result means that Latin American editors are stricter with plagiarism than those from the US and Europe, for example, is an open question. Irrespective of this underexplored problem, LA countries such as Argentina, Chile, and Brazil have broadened their international collaborative research networks with many Anglophone and Asian countries (29,30). In these multicultural collaborative endeavors, shaped by a changing landscape for doing and communicating science, operating within similar research integrity frameworks is surely an asset for researchers and institutions involved (31-34).One group that is clearly engaged in collaborative research and can offer valuable insights into views of and attitudes toward plagiarism is that of PhD holders. Exploring their views is timely, as they play a s...

No abstract

Esta obra apresenta relatos de experiência de licenciandos em estágio supervisionado realizado por meio remoto, durante a pandemia do Corona Virus (Covid 19). Os autores relatam suas experiências com relação a atividades desenvolvidas como planejamentos, aulas, avaliações e aprendizados e aplicação de tecnologias digitais em aulas remotas. Além dos relatos, este livro apresenta textos elaborados por pesquisadoras da área de educação e professoras que atuam em gestão educacional