RCR Series

NIH policy requires participation in and successful completion of instruction in Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) by individuals supported by any NIH training/research education/fellowship/career award (NOT-OD-10-019). The Postdoctoral Association at MD Anderson Cancer Center has designed the RCR Seminar Series to fulfill this requirement for postdoctoral fellows and graduate students by covering several important topics. Course attendance is monitored. To qualify for a certificate of completion according to NIH guidelines, participants must sign in and remain in attendance for the entire lecture. Participants who arrive more than 15 minutes late or leave early will not be given credit for attendance.

2012-2013 Seminar Series (Wednesdays, 12-1 pm)

A certificate of completion for the 2011-2013 academic year will be available by September 2013 to postdoctoral fellows and graduate students who attend at least eight (8) RCR lectures between September 2012 – August 2013. Seminars attended in a previous academic year or those not sponsored by the MD Anderson Postdoctoral Association will not count toward the 2012-2013 certificate.

09-12-2012 “Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship”: The procedures for assigning credit and authorship; the responsibilities of each author; accepted practices for detailing methods, analyses and results - including appropriate citations; and publication “pitfalls”. Dr. Carrie Cameron

10-10-2012 “Ethical Issues on Biomedical Research”: A discussion of the ethical standards for research, including the principles of respect, beneficence and justice. Dr. Colleen Gallagher

11-14-2012 NO SEMINAR

12-12-2012 “Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing, and Ownership”: The accepted practices and procedures for acquiring, storing, documenting, analyzing, sharing and maintaining data, including definitions for what constitutes data, procedures for maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of data, proper methods for keeping records and processing/ analyzing data; and guidelines for who ‘owns’ data. Dr. Madhu Purewal and Dr. Richard Giles

01-09-2013 “Mentor/Trainee Responsibilities”: The best approaches for selecting a mentor, managing conflicts and potential competition between mentor and trainee, mapping out the extent of collaboration between mentor and mentee and constructive procedures for mitigating abuses and resolving grievances. Dr. Amy Heimberger

02-13-2013 “Animal Welfare”: An overview of the established guidelines for the proper care and treatment of animals used in research, as well as ethical considerations surrounding research involving animals. Dr. Suzanne Craig

03-06-2013“Human Subjects”: An overview and discussion of the challenges and ethical considerations specific to the scientific community re: studying people, their tissues and their data, including responsibility for the safety and privacy of study participants. Dr. Richard L. Theriault

05-08-2013 B2.4750-AT&T Auditorium 
“Conflict of Interest and Commitment”: A discussion of how to identify and handle situations in which financial or other personal considerations have the potential to compromise or bias professional judgment and objectivity, which may ultimately undermine the public trust in science. Dr. Richard L. Theriault

06-19-2013 Onstead Auditorium S3.8012
“Collaborative Science”: The aspects of developing and maintaining research collaborations, including communicating and establishing the parameters of the collaboration (e.g. authorship determinations and sharing of data and materials) as well as collaboration between researchers from academia and industry. Dr. Gordon Mills

07-10-2013 Onstead Auditorium S3.8012 
“Communication and Difficult Conversations”: A discussion of how postdocs can use communication and diplomatic skills to navigate some aspects of the research environment, particularly when conversations between postdocs and their mentors/supervisors turn towards difficult or sensitive topics. Dr. William Brock

08-14-2013 Onstead Auditorium S3.8012 
“Peer Review”: The definition and process of peer review, the variety of activities that utilize peer review from publication to proposal submissions, the role and responsibilities of reviewers and understanding impartiality and confidentiality. Dr. Elizabeth Travis