Ten ways of ensuring affordable professional development in your institution
Research institutions have a responsibility under the Australian Code to ‘Provide ongoing training and education that promotes and supports responsible research
Griffith University’s implementation of the Australian Code (2018)
Dr Amanda Fernie, Manager Research Ethics & Integrity, Griffith University Dr Gary Allen, Senior Policy Officer, Griffith University AUSTRALIAN CODE
Beneficence as a Principle in Human Research
Pieper, I. & Thomson, C.J.H. (2016) Beneficence as a Principle in Human Research. Monash Bioethics Review. 34: 117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-016-0061-3 A
It’s not too late to register for today’s free webinar about the 2018 update to the National Statement
Details about the event below. While we hope to see you there in a few days we’ll add a recording
Get access to some great resources (two examples included in this post) and support events like the Constructive Voices panels
Every month we add at least two items to the subscribers’ area. These include vignettes and other resources to use
Constructive Voices Online Panels – National Statement session 22/11/2018 – Information for registrants
To register for this event visit https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_vwIWL16YT4S-lkMOXAxVtQ Date Panel members Questions National Statement 22/11/18 14:30 AEDT MODERATOR Mark Israel .
Constructive Voices Online Panels – Australian Code session 08/11/2018 – Information for registrants
To register for this event complete the short form at https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_nsbPkzfbT6S4YWzeEekKxA Date Panel members Questions Australian Code  8th November at
Constructive Voices Online Panels
The NHMRC, ARC and Universities Australia have had a busy 2018. Among other things, there is a new Australian Code
Categories
Featured posts
Research ethics review during a time of pandemic
Gary Allen, Mark Israel and Colin Thomson COVID-19 is prompting changes to academic delivery,
When it comes to the approach to human research ethics, did we buy London Bridge thinking it was Tower Bridge?
In this post, two experienced research ethics officers risk being decried as heretics by reflecting upon the justifications that are used for the current Human Research Ethics arrangements in countries around the world.
They use the sale of London Bridge in the Sixties and the urban myth that the US millionaire who bought it thought he was buying Tower Bridge, to ask, given the time, effort and resources expended on research ethics review, are we getting what we paid for?
There are genuine benefits that can flow from a well-conducted review process and they do justify the existence of those processes, but we should stop claiming those processes safeguard us against the criminal, unethical and reckless behaviour of the past.
They don’t and we should stop claiming in our professional development activities and resource material they do.
The Research Ethics Adviser Platform is now live
We are delighted to announce that the beta test version of the Research Ethics Adviser
The Ethics of Evaluation Research
Evaluation research is used to assess the value of such things as services, interventions,
Subscribe to newsletter
The Research Ethics Monthly is a free monthly publication about human research ethics and research integrity. It is emailed to our subscribers generally towards the end of every month.
Related Links
Research Ethics Monthly
No posts found.