A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Assessing responsible innovation training
There is broad agreement that one important aspect of responsible innovation (RI) is to provide training on its principles and practices to current and future researchers and innovators, notably including doctoral students. Much less agreement can be observed concerning the question of what this training should consist of, how it should be delivered and how it could be assessed. The increasing institutional embedding of RI leads to calls for the alignment of RI training with training in other subjects. One can therefore observe a push towards the official assessment of RI training, for example in the recent call for proposals for centres for doctoral training by UK Research and Innovation. This editorial article takes its point of departure from the recognition that the RI community will need to react to the call for assessment of RI training. It provides an overview of the background and open questions around RI training and assessment as a background of examples of RI training assessment at doctoral level. There is unlikely to be one right way of assessing RI training across institutions and disciplines, but we expect that the examples provided in this article can help RI scholars and practitioners orient their training and its assessment in ways that are academically viable as well as supportive of the overall aims of RI.
Assessing responsible innovation training
There is broad agreement that one important aspect of responsible innovation (RI) is to provide training on its principles and practices to current and future researchers and innovators, notably including doctoral students. Much less agreement can be observed concerning the question of what this training should consist of, how it should be delivered and how it could be assessed. The increasing institutional embedding of RI leads to calls for the alignment of RI training with training in other subjects. One can therefore observe a push towards the official assessment of RI training, for example in the recent call for proposals for centres for doctoral training by UK Research and Innovation. This editorial article takes its point of departure from the recognition that the RI community will need to react to the call for assessment of RI training. It provides an overview of the background and open questions around RI training and assessment as a background of examples of RI training assessment at doctoral level. There is unlikely to be one right way of assessing RI training across institutions and disciplines, but we expect that the examples provided in this article can help RI scholars and practitioners orient their training and its assessment in ways that are academically viable as well as supportive of the overall aims of RI.
Assessing responsible innovation training
Bernd Carsten Stahl (author) / Christine Aicardi (author) / Laurence Brooks (author) / Peter J. Craigon (author) / Mayen Cunden (author) / Saheli Datta Burton (author) / Martin De Heaver (author) / Stevienna De Saille (author) / Serena Dolby (author) / Liz Dowthwaite (author)
2023
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2019
Responsible innovation; responsible data. A case study in autonomous driving
| DOAJ | 2022
Responsible Research and Innovation in Construction
| TIBKAT | 2016
Organizational Orientations, Industrial Category, and Responsible Innovation
| DOAJ | 2018