38
Another cross-cutting finding from the conference is that participatory teaching formats in which the students take an active role are conducive to teaching RRI. This observation resonates very well with the conclusions from the literature review as well as the interviews. In terms of specific teaching approaches, several were brought up, ranging from performing arts over back-casting methodologies to problem-based learning. The common denominator through these approaches seemed to be the importance of providing sites for participatory reflection, using real-life issues and examples that students can relate to as a basis for the learning process. A final point of attention emerging from the concluding workshop is that there is a lack of evaluation of teaching activities which could be placed under the RRI umbrella, both in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the course contents and implementation, but also in terms of their outcomes. Do students in fact acquire the skills necessary for becoming responsible participants in the wider knowledge-based society? Which are the actual learning outcomes and how does that in turn influence the trajectory of research and innovation? Such questions are important and they point to an overall need not only for promoting RRI teaching, but also for evaluating its consequences.
4.5 Synthesis – main points emerging from review Earlier in this report, we argued that RRI teaching can mean many things. At the basic level, teaching RRI may simply involve transferring knowledge to students about the fact that there is such a concept and about the policies and practices which are in place or being developed related to the RRI notion. Awareness of the different definitions of RRI, including the EC operationalisation into six keys, but also recognition of the current initiatives to promote gender equality in science, open access, citizen and CSO involvement etc., would be likely learning outcomes. Teaching RRI may also, as the review readily displays, be about introducing to students the critical theories and studies about the interface between science and society from which the RRI concept emerged. Such teaching might not even apply the RRI terminology, but would aim to invoke a deeper understanding of the interdependencies of science and society as well as the need for addressing issues of responsibility in relation to research and innovation. Moreover, teaching RRI may aspire to influence in different ways the science-society interaction and to foster research and innovation practices which are more responsible. In this line of thinking, students should not only ‘know-that’ RRI is an issue and why it is relevant and worthwhile, but also ‘know-how’ to intervene and to influence, as citizens in research- and innovation-driven societies, the trajectories of research and innovation, and/or to practice research and innovation in ways which are responsible. What we have found in the process of this review, is that RRI teaching does indeed capture a broad variety of different educational activities and formats. Crucially, only a minority of the activities and practices which were reviewed here even applied the RRI terminology. However, there were some