Accountability in Research
Open access
Creating research ethics and integrity country report cards: Case study from Europe
- Download citation
- https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2022.2163632
Introduction
Recommendations for future ri and re initiatives, study limitations, disclosure statement, additional information, research article.
- Full Article
- Figures & data
- Reprints & Permissions
- View PDF PDF View EPUB EPUB
Structures for and practices of research integrity (RI) and research ethics (RE) differ among countries. This study analyzed the processes and structures for RI and RE in Europe, following the framework developed at the World Conferences on Research Integrity. We present RI and RE Country Report Cards for 16 European countries, which included the information on RI and RE structures, processes and outcomes. While some of the countries are front-runners when it comes to RI and RE, with well-established and continually developing policies and structures, others are just starting their journey in RI and RE. Although RI and RE contextual divergences must be taken into account, a level of harmonization among the countries is necessary so that researchers working in the European area can similarly handle RI and RE issues and have similar expectations regardless of the organization in which they work. RI and RE Country Report Cards can be a tool to monitor, compare, and strengthen RE and integrity across countries through empowerment and inspiration by examples of good practices and developed systems.
- Research integrity
- responsible conduct of research
- country report cards
- research integrity framework
- research integrity governance
Creating optimal research and research ethics and integrity (RE and RI) governance framework is an important task for all stakeholders in research (Bouter Citation 2018 ). Initiatives from all around the world addressing this issue have offered numerous recommendations for developing and implementing policies, structures, and procedures to promote responsible research practices and adequately handle research misconduct (Singapore Statement on Research integrity Citation 2010 ; All European Academies (ALLEA) Citation 2017 ; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) Citation 2017 ; World Economic Forum (WEF) Citation 2018 ; National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Citation 2018 ). Moreover, different government agencies, advisory bodies, and scientific societies continually develop codes, guidelines, reports, and other documents addressing this topic (Komić, Marušić, and Marušić Citation 2015 ; Aubert Bonn, Godecharle, and Dierickx Citation 2017 ; Ščepanović et al. Citation 2021 ; Hastings et al. Citation 2022 ). However, a recent scoping review showed that the approaches to RI, although usually having a shared understanding of values and norms related to responsible research, often differ between countries and local contexts (Ščepanović et al. Citation 2021 ). In that sense, efforts by different organizations, including the report by the European Science Foundation (ESF) “Fostering Research Integrity in Europe” (European Science Foundation (ESF) Citation 2011 ), the Science Europe survey report on RI practices in European research organizations (Science Europe Citation 2016 ), the European Code of Conduct for RI by All European Academies (ALLEA) (All European Academies (ALLEA) Citation 2017 ), and the Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on RI (European Commission (EC) Citation 2018 ), all recognized a variety of approaches to the promotion of RI and handling research misconduct across European countries, based on the differences in national and institutional policies, as well as differences in countries’ traditions, structures, processes, and funding systems in research.
Given intensive collaborations between European researchers and research institutions, a common and harmonized understanding of RI is recognized as an essential step in the further development of RI in Europe (Hermerén et al. Citation 2019 ; Marušić Citation 2019 ; Roje et al. Citation 2021 ). As emphasized in the ALLEA’s European Code of Conduct for RI, creating a shared understanding of RI by respecting countries’ differences involves acknowledging the legal and ethical responsibility of the research community in articulating principles and standards in research and defining the relevant criteria for responsible research behavior that enhance the quality of research (All European Academies (ALLEA) Citation 2017 ). It also means that research institutions, which are recognized as having an important role in defining RI standards, should promote responsible research practices by offering tailored research ethics and integrity training, raising awareness of relevant codes and regulations, and handling research misconduct honestly and transparently (Mejlgaard et al. Citation 2020 ). Different initiatives tried to address the responsibilities and roles of different research stakeholders to help them recognize and implement common essential steps on the journey of fostering and promoting RI. For example, the Global Science Report on RI from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) emphasized the importance of research institutions’ administrative bodies for handling research misconduct (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and development (OECD) Global Science Forum Citation 2007 ). Similarly, the RePAIR Consensus guidelines outlined the primary responsibilities of research institutions in providing policies and personnel to ensure compliance with RI standards and establishment of RI culture within institutions (Collaborative Working Group from the conference “Keeping the Pool Clean: Prevention and Management of Misconduct Related Retractions” Citation 2018 ). Further, the Bonn-Printeger Statement offered 13 recommendations to research institutions for RI promotion, including providing information and training and raising awareness on RI, creating and fostering an open and trustworthy environment, and improving approaches to handling cases of research misconduct (Forsberg et al. Citation 2018 ). Although RI governance frameworks should be able to provide common standards, translating global principles and standards of RI into different national policies, structures and practices is not an easy task. Having an overview of existing RI frameworks could help the research community get a step closer to fulfilling this task.
The idea for the creation of RI Country Report Cards emerged from the discussions at the 4th World Conferences of Research Integrity (WCRI) in 2015, where the representatives from countries around the world discussed the usefulness, feasibility, and content of Country Report Cards for RI and suggested the structure-process-outcome framework to describe the research environment and efforts to uphold and foster RI (Kleinert and Marušić Citation 2016 ). Our study was inspired by this initiative, as well as the MLE on RI, where the participants from 14 European countries worked on creating a comprehensive set of information on RI in their countries (European Commission (EC) Citation 2018 ). Since RI is continuously developing and evolving, together with RI frameworks, this study aimed to update the information on RI frameworks from 14 European countries that participated in MLE and 2 additional countries that participated in the EnTIRE (Mapping Normative Frameworks for EThics and Integrity of REsearch) project (CORDIS – Community Research And Development Information Service Citation 2017 ; Embassy of Good Science ( Citation 2022 ) and to compare the frameworks between these 16 countries.
Country report cards at the WCRI
Published online:
Table 1. areas and items for research integrity country report cards presented at the 4th world conference on research integrity, 2015..
At the 5th WCRI in Amsterdam in 2017, RI Country Report Cards continued to be the focus of RI initiatives. The representatives from 4 countries (Croatia, Norway, UK, and the USA) presented their report cards and shared various experiences and approaches to RI (Engh Citation 2017 ; Hammat Citation 2017 ; Marušić Citation 2017 ; Wager Citation 2017 ).
Country report cards in MLE on RI
Table 2. areas and items for research integrity country report cards modified during the mutual learning exercise of the european commission, 2018., country report cards in the entire project.
The initial version of the Country Report Cards developed by the EnTIRE project ( Marusic et al. Citation 2018 ), was further modified and developed to contribute to the The Embassy of Good Science, an online Wikimedia site for the research community to discuss about RI and RE questions, as well as to provide the comparison of RI and RE initiatives and efforts across European countries. RI Country Report Cards at The Embassy of Good Science are expected to be continually updated by researchers from individual countries – to monitor progress and have easily accessible information on RI and RE status quo across countries.
Figure 1. Countries included in the country report cards analysis.
Table 3. Areas and items for Research Integrity Country Report Cards in the EnTIRE project.
To fill in the Country Report Cards with the relevant information, we first conducted a search of the web pages of the European Network of Research Ethics Committees (EUREC) and European Network of Research Integrity Officers (ENRIO). Further, we searched the internet using the Google search engine and search terms “research integrity” AND “name of the country.” Apart from that, we searched national research councils and ethics committees, national agencies on RE/RI, national scientific funds, and national academies of science for each of the 16 countries. The search was conducted during 2020 through 2022.
This article used the information and methodological approaches from the MLE on RI and EnTIRE project to present the results on 16 European countries.
Research infrastructure, funding, and strategy
Table 4. research infrastructure, research funding, and research strategy in analyzed countries..
Concerning research infrastructure, northern and some western European countries have a higher number of full-time researchers and universities. For example, Scandinavian countries have the highest number of full-time researchers per million inhabitants. Finland leads in this parameter, with 9,309 researchers per million inhabitants in 2019. It is followed by Sweden with 9,084 (2019) and Norway with 8,729 (2018) researchers per million inhabitants. Eastern European countries have lower number of researchers employed full-time. The country with the lowest number of full-time researchers was Moldova, with only 608 full-time researchers per million inhabitants in 2018. The country with the highest number of universities is Spain ( n = 75), followed by Austria ( n = 55), and Bulgaria ( n = 51). The country with the lowest number of universities is Luxembourg, with a single university. Of course, in interpreting these results we must take into account the country size, as larger countries will have more universities.
For the topic of research funding, we used the data concerning the gross expenditures on R&D for each country and calculated the percent of the country’s GDP. The country with the highest investment in R&D is Sweden, which comprises 3.4% of its GDP, followed by Austria with 3.1%, and Denmark with 2.9%. Countries whose R&D gross expenditures are below 1.0% of their GDP are Croatia (1.0%), Bulgaria (0.8%), and Moldova (0.3%). All 16 countries have research strategies developed and implemented on the national level.
Research governance, compliance and integrity structures
Figure 2. Overview of research governance, compliance, and integrity structures in countries included in the analysis.
Table 5. Research governance, compliance, and integrity structures in analyzed countries.
National bodies for ri and re.
The majority of the countries included in this study have established policies and structures for RI and RE, but they differ in certain aspects. When it comes to RI and RE bodies, a great number of countries had an official national structure responsible for providing the RI and RE governance framework. France, for example, has eight national bodies that promote RI and RE, the highest among the countries in the study. These bodies have an advisory and monitoring role, or provide support to higher education and research institutions. France is followed by Norway, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands, with six RI and RE national bodies each, all with similar objectives. Apart from promoting RI and RE, national RI and RE bodies in some of these 16 countries also provide relevant information and discuss issues related to RI and RE, develop national guidelines on RI and RE, support the implementation of RI and RE policies, and facilitate collaboration. Moldova is the only country without an official RI and RE structure. The Moldovan National Authority for Integrity deals only with public servants and heads of institutes. It does not address RI and RE or researchers in general.
National codes for RI and RE and guidelines for researchers
Six countries (Denmark, Estonia, France, Ireland, Spain, and the Netherlands) have national codes for RI and RE. Although some Scandinavian countries (Finland, Norway, and Sweden) do not have national codes for RI and RE, institutions responsible for promoting RI and RE in these countries have developed various guidelines for researchers and other stakeholders involved in research. Among these countries, Finland has the highest number of guidelines addressing different RI and RE topics. For example, Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK) has issued numerous guidelines, among them “Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland. Guidelines of the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity 2012” and “Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) guidelines” available in Finnish, Swedish, and English (Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK) Citation 2012 , Citation 2021 ). Norway, with several national bodies for promoting RI and RE, also issued several guidelines and checklists regarding ethics and integrity across different research areas. The National Commission for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT) developed Guidelines for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT) Citation 2016 ), the National Committee for Research Ethics in Social Sciences and Humanities (NESH) issued Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and Humanities (Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) Citation 2021 ), whereas the National Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (NEM) published various guidelines. Sweden also does not have a national code for RI and RE, however, the Swedish Research Council has its ethical guidelines and internal Expert Group on Ethics which has published the book Good Research Practice (Swedish Research Council Citation 2017 ), intended primarily for researchers.
Processes for handling research misconduct
The analysis of 16 European countries showed that they differ when it comes to institutions that handle research misconduct allegations and cases. Some of the countries have specific national bodies that handle cases of research misconduct (Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, Finland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Spain, and Sweden), whereas in other countries (Croatia, Estonia, France, Greece, Ireland, Moldova, and the Netherlands) research institutions, such as universities, are responsible for dealing with such cases. However, some of the research institutions that deal with research misconduct cases are affiliated with independent bodies that advise possible violations of the principles of RI and RE. For example, institutional Boards in the Netherlands are advised by the Netherlands Board on Research Integrity (LOWI) on this matter. Greece, on the other hand, apart from having research performing institutions that deal with the cases of alleged misconduct, sometimes has ad-hoc committees for handling research misconduct issues. Croatia has a national body for RE and RI, but it does not seem to be functional at the moment.
Legal protection of whistleblowers
The case analysis showed that countries also differ when it comes to the legal protection of whistleblowers in research. Austria, France, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, and the Netherlands have specific legal acts for whistleblowers’ protection. In the Netherlands, for example, scientific integrity counselors are appointed at universities for assisting both whistleblowers and those accused of research misconduct. On the other hand, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Luxembourg, Moldova, and Spain do not provide legal protection for whistleblowers. Resources that we searched for relevant information did not provide data for Croatia, Finland, and Sweden in this matter.
Laws and regulations
Table 6. laws and regulations concerning ri and re., measures to promote good scientific practices and open science.
The category “Measures to promote good scientific practices and open science” in the Country Report Cards contained three sub-items – RI and RE training, RI and RE dialogue and communication, and RI and RE incentives. With these items, we captured the information related to the availability and types of RI and RE training and educational courses, open science initiatives, and communication initiatives (information related to informing society about RI and RE and research misconduct cases and organizations participating in the international RI and RE networks and initiatives), and research incentives (related to the incentives, evaluations, and awards for institutions and individuals based on research output, as well as incentives for collaborative science and networks).
RI and RE training and education
We collected the information on whether there is training and education in RI and RE across countries. We explored the main characteristics of RI and RE training and education – the obligatory or non-obligatory nature, mode of delivery, and targeted audience. The obtained data showed a great diversity between countries regarding the compulsory and voluntary nature of RI and RE training and education. Moreover, this diversity is seen not only when comparing countries but within a single country, there are often differences between mandatory and non-mandatory RI and RE training. For example, in Austria, RI and RE training is mostly non-mandatory, however, at some doctoral programs and some universities, it is mandatory for those who want to qualify to an academic positions (professorship). In some countries, RI and RE training and education were mandated on the national level, i.e., the federal or governmental body has brought the decision, document, or law-making RI and RE training mandatory, such as in Denmark, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, and Moldova. In these countries, RI and RE training is mostly mandatory for at least doctoral students, postdoctoral researchers, and all publicly-funded research organizations.
The responsibility for delivering RI and RE training and education also differs between the countries. While in Austria, Ireland, and Luxembourg, the national RI and RE agencies and forums (Austrian Agency for Research Integrity, Luxembourg Agency for Research Integrity, and Irish National Research Integrity Forum) are responsible for training and educating researchers, in Denmark, France, Moldova, and the Netherlands this is usually the responsibility of research organizations. Spain also has a national document (National Statement of Scientific Integrity) (CSIC Citation 2015 ) referring to RI and RE education; however, this document provides recommendations rather than imposing an obligation to research organizations to deliver RI and RE training. The search of the relevant data from other countries, i.e., Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden, showed that RI and RE training also exists but is non-obligatory, and it is up to each researcher to decide whether to undergo the training or not, regardless of training being provided by research organizations or national RI and RE bodies.
Table 7. Characteristics of RI and RE training and education across different European countries.
Ri and re dialogue and communication.
For this framework element of the Country Report Cards, we collected the information on whether research and research data are usually open and whether there are existing national and institutional initiatives for making data open. Further, we obtained information on whether there are initiatives aiming at informing the general public about RI and RE issues and breaches and gathered information on whether there are other initiatives involving dialogue and communication between the research community and the general public, such as science fairs that serve as a place for disseminating research and bringing science closer to the general public. Moreover, we obtained information on the level of public trust in science and researchers.
Table 8. Open science initiatives available in different European countries.
The topic of informing the general public about RI and research misconduct is occasionally discussed in the lay press in most countries, and mostly when related to publicly funded research, research fraud, and corruption. In some countries, research misconduct cases are handled confidentially, and decisions are usually not available or discussed publicly, but anonymous statistics on handled cases are published (e.g., Austria and Finland). In some countries, research misconduct is often addressed and discussed in the lay press, which is used to raise awareness of RI and RE among the general public (e.g., Ireland and Norway). In most countries, there was a low public trust in science due to the frauds, scandals, and corruption in academia and science. However, we found that public trust in science is perceived high in Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, and the Netherlands. We identified different initiatives across countries aiming at bringing science and research closer to the general public. In Austria and Norway, members of national academies of sciences inform the general public about important scientific insights. In all countries included in the analysis, higher education institutions communicate research to the public, which is often done at festivals, conferences, or public meetings. Future research conducted with the Country Report Cards could also include information on how organizations use social media communication to establish a relationship with public.
The element of incentives in the Country Report Cards captured the information related to the awards and other incentives for institutions (universities) or individuals based on the research outputs, as well as for collaborative science and research networks. We also included the information about whether there are any incentives related to RI and RE and whether RI and RE are a part of the institutional quality assessment.
Awards and prizes for outstanding research contributions, innovations, exist in every country included in our Country Report Cards. These rewards are often awarded annually by research institutions (universities) or governments to further promote research and innovation. The awards and scholarships are also often provided for early career researchers and students to help them establish their collaborative networks and project early in their careers.
Some of the countries have special tax schemes that encourage research activities. These include, for example, lower tax for those who carry out research in the country (Austria), a special tax scheme for researchers recruited from abroad (Denmark), a research tax credit that supports business and research and development activities by providing tax assistance (France), income tax relief for investigating research and development sector (Lithuania), and tax relief in the research and development sector (Norway and Spain).
Regarding the collaboration initiatives in almost all countries, there are incentives for collaboration. For example, some countries are devoted to promoting the collaboration between research and business sectors, whether through providing funding to research-industry collaborative projects (e.g., Austria, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway) or creating other national initiatives that will encourage industry to engage in more work with researchers. Regarding the latter, an example is the Lithuanian Ministry of Higher Education and Science, which allocated funding in 2010 to support the employment of researchers in industry and business enterprises. In Norway, the industrial doctoral program was established to promote and enhance cooperation and mobility between research and industry, increase research activities in the industry and equip researchers with the knowledge they will need to work in the industry and business sector. Besides incentives for establishing collaboration between research and industry, all countries offer various incentives that promote collaboration between research institutions (universities), especially international collaborations. Some initiatives include paying membership fees in international societies to support international collaborative networks as it is done by the Academy of Finland, the Baltic Bonus scheme to promote cooperation between Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, and the France “Setting Up European or International Scientific Networks (MRSEI)” (French National Research Agency Citation 2022 ) that supports the networks coordinated by French researchers and encourages their participation in European and international projects.
Regarding quality assessment and whether this process takes into account RI and RE, we found information that RI and RE are a part of quality assessment in some countries. However, for most of the countries we were unable to find the full information. Examples include Austria, where RI and RE are a part of quality assessment in some institutions (e.g., the Ombudsman Office at the University of Vienna is under the coordination of the Unit for Quality Assurance). In Croatia, research impact assessment and translation of research findings to the community is a part of the accreditation process for research and higher education institutions. In Denmark, RI and RE are a part of the institutional quality assessment as all research institutions had to adopt the Danish Code of Conduct for RI. In Finland, RI and RE are a part of institutional quality assessment, and universities have to organize international research assessments every 6 years to measure the quality of research. In Moldova, RI and RE are included as a part of the evaluation schemes for doctoral studies. Moreover, regarding the assessment of researchers in the Netherlands, the University of Ghent and the University of Utrecht introduced RI and RE requirements for evaluating researchers for career promotions.
The analysis of RI and RE frameworks across 16 European countries showed the existence of a variety of approaches to RI and RE promotion and implementation. While some of the countries are front-runners when it comes to RI, with well-established and continually developing policies and structures, others are just starting their journey in RI and often using RE – the concept developed prior to RI and focusing on the moral perspective of research – policies and structures for handling RI issues. Although most of the analyzed countries are European Union (EU) member states, the analysis showed that there is a diversity of RI and RE frameworks, as well as that the level of development of RI and RE structures differ, although we could expect a certain level of uniformity within the EU. However, despite the different levels of development, our analysis showed that RI and RE have been continually developing and getting more and more attention. This is evident from the previously conducted analyses of RI and RE structures and our study that shows that more and more European countries are actively working on establishing the bodies that will deal with RI and RE issues (Hermerén et al. Citation 2019 ; Marušić Citation 2019 ). However, a long path is ahead of some European countries that just entered the global RI and RE arena, which recognizing the importance of addressing and emphasizing the RI and RE issues within their research setting.
As shown in our general mapping of research frameworks within Europe and by the comparison of the statistics through the years, there is a rising number of people being employed in the public and private research sector, as well as more and more funds invested in research. Consequently, European countries are investing more resources (both financial and human) in establishing RI policies and structures which is evident from our analysis that showed that 15 out of 16 countries in our study have some sort of national establishment for handling RI. This means that the awareness of the importance of RI and recognition of its specifics compared to RE are being more and more recognized. We deliberately used the term “a sort of establishment” because the way the RI structures are organized is not the same in all countries. While some countries are more developed in this area, having the umbrella RI bodies that handle RI issues across organizations, in other countries, there are bodies at public universities and other public research institutions designated to handle RI and RE issues. The latter could also be prone to more discrepancies between how RI and RE cases, especially cases of research misconduct and other poor research practices are handled and could contribute to poor implementation of RI and RE standards. In that sense, the establishment of the umbrella RI bodies at the national level is something that European countries should strive for to ensure the equal implementation of RI standards in practice. Unfortunately, our analysis shows that even today, the increase in RI awareness is paralleled by a small percentage of countries in which RE committees handle RI issues, although it is well accepted today that RI and RE are similar but not the same concepts and that they have different aims and stakeholders involved. This is something that has not changed since the previous similar analysis conducted under the MLE for RI in 2018/2019 (Hermerén et al. Citation 2019 ; Marušić Citation 2019 ). This is also something that needs to be changed in the future – the distinction between these two concepts is necessary to handle both research ethics and integrity issues (Steneck Citation 2006 ).
Concerning the RI and RE guidance, our analysis showed that some countries included in the analysis have some sort of guidance, such as codes and guidelines on the national level. However, creating the RI and RE guidance is today more emphasized as the task for research organizations. This is in accordance with some other studies that mapped existing RI and RE guidance for research performing and funding organizations. For example, a recent scoping review (Ščepanović Citation 2021 ) showed there is a great number of various types of guidance documents related to RI developed and implemented by research organizations. However, there are significant differences when the content of this guidance is examined, which warrants the conclusion that more harmonization in this aspect is needed. Moreover, the study exploring codes of conduct for RI across various European countries showed differences and divergences in guidance practices and standards, as well (Desmond and Dierickx Citation 2021 ). One initiative to achieve harmonization was developed by the All European Academies and that is the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECoC for RI) – the European framework for regulating RI (All European Academies (ALLEA) Citation 2017 ). The national guidance in Europe could in the future be developed based on the principles presented in the ECoC for RI and built upon its recommendations. This could ensure a certain level of uniformity and contribute to equal application of RI and RE standards and hence better avoidance of research misconduct and other poor research practices. Our study also showed that only a small number of European countries have established legal protection for whistleblowers, although it has been recognized across available literature that whistleblowers have an important role in diagnosing research misconduct and preventing future poor research behavior (All European Academies (ALLEA) Citation 2017 ; Bouter and Hendrix Citation 2017 ; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) Citation 2017 ). Moreover, the lack of proper whistleblowers’ protection is also found to be one of the negative factors that contribute to future research misconduct and hinder RI implementation. Having the right procedures in place, preferably legally recognized, for the protection of those who report observed research misconduct could help in encouraging people to report research malpractice without fear for their career and other negative consequences that whistleblowers are usually exposed.
In regard to the national laws and regulations concerning RI and RE, we saw that all countries in the have at least one law concerning different aspects of RI and RE. The number of specific laws or bylaws ranged from 2 (Croatia) to 17 (the Netherlands). We found that the area of data protection in research is mostly well established and regulated by national laws. This is due to General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provisions being mandatory in almost all countries included in the study, as they are EU member states. However, since the GDPR explicitly says that data protection should be more precisely defined by the member states laws, which also includes data protection in research, not all countries included in the analysis have such national laws or at least not developed enough (Croatia is an example). Another example of policies applicable across European countries is related to the European Commission funding program Horizon Europe. In 2021 Horizon Europe implemented the requirement for all grant applicants to declare compliance with RI standards and practices outlined in the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (European Commission (EC) Citation 2021 ). This made the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity a “soft law” implemented across European countries.
The analysis of measures aimed to promote good scientific practices and open science focused on RI and RE training and open science initiatives. RI and RE training is recognized as being one of the initiators of better RI and RE implementation (Labib et al. Citation 2021 ; Pizzolato and Dierickx Citation 2021 ). In our analysis, we noticed a great diversity between the obligatory and non-obligatory nature of the RI and RE training that was not necessarily between the countries, but diversity exists also within the countries. The analysis showed that RI and RE training is still non-obligatory in many European countries and that the most targeted population are Ph.D. students. Although it is important to start to educate researchers on the RI and RE issues early in their career recent studies shows that more initiatives are needed also for educating senior researchers, continually since they are supervisors to early-career researchers who often look upon their research behavior and who learn from their senior colleagues and supervisors (Labib et al. Citation 2021 ). This is recognized as being an important aspect of future initiatives in RI and RE education – to empower researchers of all career stages to engage in RI and RE training and translate the acquired knowledge for future generations of researchers.
As funders increasingly require open access to publications to ensure transparency and enhance verifiability of research open science has come into the spotlight. Although open science is much more than just publishing research in open access format (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Citation 2018 ), this aspect of open science, together with open data is the most addressed by existing policies within the analyzed countries. Our analysis shows that open science is well addressed by analyzed countries and their policies as most countries have national strategies for open science and well-established structures to ensure open access to publications, data, and other research products.
Although RI is gaining more and more attention, and is recognized today as a concept different from RE in many European countries, some countries still need to separate the policies and processes aimed at RI and RE. Having separate policies, processes, as well as bodies for handling specific RI or RE issues is important for the adequate promotion and implementation of RI.
Although many organizations have different bodies for handling RI issues, a national umbrella body that will deal with RI and research misconduct at the national level is important for achieving a level of harmonization and uniformity at the national level, as well as for systemic promotion of RI.
Having national RI guidance and policies can contribute to achieving harmonization and uniformity in dealing with RI and research misconduct issues within a country. It will also help researchers to avoid confusion when it comes to what rules apply when they change research institutions.
Although national RI and RE frameworks are important for providing an overview of policies, practices, and processes implemented and promoted across European countries, our study did not take into account the organizational differences that may exist within a country. Hence the results of our study are limited to a broad and general overview of RI and RE structures and processes, as exploring the organizational nuances in this area was out of the scope of our study. However, we believe that having this general overview of RI and RE across European countries provides a glimpse into what we can expect from research organizations (universities and other research performing organizations) in each country in the context of RI and RE policies, practices, and processes. Another possible limitation of our study is that we took into account only publicly available information, hence there is a possibility that we did not included in our analysis and subsequently results all the possible aspects of research and RI. This means that we did not included information related to publicly unavailable organizational policies and process for RI and RE focused on researchers, as well as research administrators and managers that play an important role in the research process. However, we believe that we captured enough information for presenting a broad overview of how RI and RE are established, promoted, and implemented in different countries. Future studies could use our results as a basis to delve more in depth into RI and RE in each specific country.
Our exercise with RI Country Report Cards showed the existence of many initiatives aiming at RI and RE promotion and implementation across various European countries. However, the analysis also showed there are still great differences when it comes to promoting and implementing RI and RE standards into practice which is evident from, for example, the way RI and RE issues are handled or RI and RE education provided. This shows that RI and RE in Europe needs to continue its development and perhaps try to reach a certain level of harmonization so that researchers working in the European areas have the same expectation and management of RI and RE issues in a similar way, regardless of the place of work. This is particularly important for research mobility, as it is promoted by national and European funders. RI Country Report Cards have an element of continual mutual learning exercise, designed to serve for sharing knowledge and experiences between stakeholders with more or less RI and RE experience, and can be used as an inspiration or motivation to those who work on the RI and RE promotion and implementation.
*We mapped all public and private higher education institutions in France – universities, Grandes écoles, and specialized schools.
All authors participated in the EnTIRE project. AM was a part of the 4th and 5th WCRI on RI where Country report Cards were presented, as well as a part of the MLE for RI working group.
Authors’ contributions
APP conducted the search, extracted, updated, and analyzed the data, interpreted the results, and wrote and edited the manuscript.
RR conducted the search, extracted and analyzed the data for some Country Report Cards, interpreted the results, and wrote and edited the manuscript.
VT conducted the search and extracted the data for some Country Report Cards, and contributed to the revision of the manuscript.
AM developed the protocol for the study, interpreted the results, revised the manuscript and supervised the research.
- All European Academies (ALLEA). 2017 . The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity . Berlin : All European Academies . https://www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Aubert Bonn, N. , S. Godecharle , and K. Dierickx . 2017 . “ European Universities’ Guidance on Research Integrity and Misconduct .” Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 12 (1): 33 – 44 . doi: 10.1177/1556264616688980 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Bouter, L. M. 2018 . “ Fostering Responsible Research Practices is a Shared Responsibility of Multiple Stakeholders .” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 96: 143 – 146 . doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.12.016 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Bouter, L. M. , and S. Hendrix . 2017 . “ Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection .” Accountability in Research 24 (6): 359 – 366 . doi: 10.1080/08989621.2017.1327814 . [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Collaborative Working Group from the conference “Keeping the Pool Clean: Prevention and Management of Misconduct Related Retractions”. 2018 . “ RePair Consensus Guidelines: Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in Protecting the Integrity of the Research Record .” Research Integrity and Peer Review 3 (1): 15 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0055-1 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Google Scholar]
- CORDIS – Community Research And Development Information Service. 2017 . “ Mapping Normative Frameworks for Ethic and Integrity of Research (EnTire) Project .” https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/741782/en [Google Scholar]
- Desmond, H. , and K. Dierickx . 2021 . “ Research Integrity Codes of Conduct in Europe: Understanding the Divergences .” Bioethics 35 (5): 414 – 428 . doi: 10.1111/bioe.12851 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Donabedian, A. 1992 . “ Quality Assurance. Structure, Process, Outcome .” Nursing Standards 7 (11 Suppl QA): 4 – 51 . doi: 10.7748/ns.7.11.4.s71 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Google Scholar]
- Embassy of Good Science. 2022 . “ Country Report Cards .” https://embassy.science/wikiwiki/index.php/Special:BrowseData/Report?_search_Report_Type%5B0%5D=Country+Report+Cards [Google Scholar]
- Engh, E. 2017 .” Country Report Card on Research Integrity: Norway – a Broad Approach .” Presentation at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity , Amsterdam , 28-31 May 2017 . https://wcrif.org/images/2017/documents/3.%20Wednesday%20May%2031,%202017/1.%20Aula/E.%20Engh%20-%20Country%20report%20card%20on%20research%20integrity%20-%20Norway%20-%20a%20broad%20approach%20to%20research%20integrity.pdf [Google Scholar]
- European Commission (EC). 2018 . “ Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on Research Integrity .” https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/en/statistics/policy-support-facility/mle-research-integrity [Google Scholar]
- European Commission (EC). 2021 . “ Horizon Europe Programme. Standard Application Form (RIA, IA). Version 2.0 .” European Commission, April 22 . https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/temp-form/af/af_he-ria-ia_en.pdf [Google Scholar]
- European Science Foundation (ESF). 2011 . “ Fostering Research Integrity in Europe .” https://www.esf.org/fileadmin/user_upload/esf/ResearchIntegrity_Report2011.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK). 2012 . “ Responsible Conduct of Research and Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct in Finland .” https://tenk.fi/sites/tenk.fi/files/HTK_ohje_2012.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK). 2021 . “ The Responsible Conduct of Research Guidelines .” https://tenk.fi/en/advice-and-materials/RCR-Guidelines-2012 [Google Scholar]
- Forsberg, E. M. , F. O. Anthun , S. Bailey , G. Birchley , H. Bout , C. Casonato , G. G. Fuster , B. Heinrichs , S. Horbach , I. S. Jacobsen , et al. 2018 . “ Working with Research Integrity—guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement .” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4): 1023 – 1034 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0034-4 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- French National Research Agency. 2022 . “ Setting Up European or International Scientific Networks (MRSEI) .” https://anr.fr/en/call-for-proposals-details/call/call-for-proposals-setting-up-european-or-international-scientific-networks-mrsei-edition-2022/ [Google Scholar]
- Hammat, Z. H. 2017 . “ Accountability & Transparency for Research Integrity via Country Report Cards: USA .” Presentation at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity , Amsterdam , 28-31 May 2017 . https://wcrif.org/images/2017/documents/3.%20Wednesday%20May%2031,%202017/1.%20Aula/Z.%20Hammatt%20%20Accountability%20and%20transparency%20for%20research%20integrity%20via%20country%20report%20cards.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Hastings, R. C. , K. Labib , I. Lechner , L. Bouter , G. Widdershoven , and N. Evans . 2022 . “ Guidance on Research Integrity Provided by European Discipline-Specific Learned Societies: A Scoping Review .” doi: 10.1093/scipol/scac067 . [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]
- Hermerén, G. , H. Zwart , A. Marušić , and D. Fanelli . 2019 . “ Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on Research Integrity .” Final Report. https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/sites/default/files/rio/report/MLE%2520RI_Final%2520Report_0.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Kleinert, S. , and A. Marušić . 2016 . “ F2 Focus Track on Improving Research Systems: The Role of Countries. Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Research Integrity .” Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (Suppl 1): 55 – 56 . doi: 10.1186/s41073-016-0012-9 . [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]
- Komić, D. , S. L. Marušić , and A. Marušić . 2015 . “ Research Integrity and Research Ethics in Professional Codes of Ethics: Survey of Terminology Used by Professional Organizations Across Research Disciplines .” Plos One 10 (7): e0133662 . doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133662 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Labib, K. , N. Evans , R. Roje , P. Kavouras , A. Reyes Elizondo , W. Kaltenbrunner , I. Buljan , T. Ravn , G. Widdershoven , L. Bouter , et al. 2021 . “ Education and Training Policies for Research Integrity: Insights from a Focus Group Study .” Science & Public Policy scab077 . doi: 10.1093/scipol/scab077 . [Crossref] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Luxembourg Agency for Research Integrity (LARI). 2022 . “ Research Training .” https://lari.lu/lari-services/researcher-training/ [Google Scholar]
- Marušić, A. 2017 . “ Report Card: Croatia .” Presentation at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity , Amsterdam , 28-31 May 2017 . https://wcrif.org/images/2017/documents/3.%20Wednesday%20May%2031,%202017/1.%20Aula/A.%20Marusic%20%20Accountability%20and%20transparency%20for%20research%20integrity%20via%20country%20report%20cards.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Marušić, A. 2019 . “ Mutual Learning Exercise (MLE) on Research Integrity: Processes and Structures - Thematic Report No 1 .” https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/sites/default/files/rio/report/MLE%2520RI%2520-%2520Thematic%2520Report%25201.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Marušić, A. , I. Buljan , L. Barać , L. R. Tokalić , and M. Malički . 2018 . “ ENTIRE D.4.2, Protocol for Literature and Country Resources Search and Data Collection .” https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/741782/results [Google Scholar]
- Mejlgaard, N. , L. M. Bouter , G. Gaskell , P. Kavouras , N. Allum , A. K. Bendtsen , C. Charitidis , N. Claesen , K. Dierickx , A. Domaradzka , et al. 2020 . “ Research Integrity: Nine Ways to Move from Talk to Walk .” Nature 586 (7829): 358 – 360 . https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02847-8 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018 . Open Science by Design: Realizing a Vision for 21st Century Research . Washington, DC : The National Academies Press . doi: 10.17226/25116 . [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). 2017 . Fostering Integrity in Research . Washington, DC : The National Academies Press . doi: 10.17226/21896 . [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]
- National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). 2018 . Australian Code of Conduct for Responsible Conduct of Research . Canberra : Commonwealth of Australia . https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/australian-code-responsible-conduct-research-2018 [Google Scholar]
- Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT). 2016 . “ Guidelines for Research Ethics in Science and Technology .” https://www.forskningsetikk.no/globalassets/dokumenter/4-publikasjoner-som-pdf/60126_fek_guidelines_nent_digital.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH). 2021 . “ Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities .” https://www.forskningsetikk.no/en/guidelines/social-sciences-humanities-law-and-theology/guidelines-for-research-ethics-in-the-social-sciences-humanities-law-and-theology/ [Google Scholar]
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and development (OECD) Global Science Forum. 2007 . “ Best Practices for Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Preventing Misconduct .” https://www.oecd.org/science/inno/40188303.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Pizzolato, D. , and K. Dierickx . 2021 . “ Stakeholders’ Perspectives on Research Integrity Training Practices: A Qualitative Study .” BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1): 67 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00637-z . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Roje, R. , V. Tomić , I. Buljan , and A. Marušić . 2021 . “ Development and Implementation of Research Integrity Guidance Documents: Explorative Interviews with Research Integrity Experts .” Accountability in Research 1 – 38 . Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1989676 . [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Ščepanović, R. , K. Labib , I. Buljan , J. Tijdink , and A. Marušić . 2021 . “ Practices for Research Integrity Promotion in Research Performing Organisations and Research Funding Organisations: A Scoping Review .” Science and Engineering Ethics 27 (1): 4 . doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00281-1 . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Science Europe. 2016 . “ Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe Member Organisations. Survey Report .” https://scienceeurope.org/our-resources/research-integrity-practices-in-science-europe-member-organisations/ [Google Scholar]
- Singapore Statement on Research integrity. 2010 . https://wcrif.org/guidance/singapore-statement [Google Scholar]
- Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). 2015 . “ National Statement on Scientific Integrity .” http://www.enrio.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/csic-national-statement-on-scientific-integrity.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Steneck, N. H. 2006 . “ Fostering Integrity in Research: Definitions, Current Knowledge, and Future Decisions .” Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1): 53 – 74 . doi: 10.1007/s11948-006-0006-y . [Crossref] , [PubMed] , [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]
- Swedish Research Council. 2017 . “ Good Research Practice .” https://www.vr.se/download/18.5639980c162791bbfe697882/1555334908942/Good-Research-Practice_VR_2017.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Wager, E. 2017 . “ Research Integrity Country Report Card: UK .” Presentation at the 5th World Conference on Research Integrity , Amsterdam , 28-31 May 2017 . https://wcrif.org/images/2017/documents/3.%20Wednesday%20May%2031,%202017/1.%20Aula/E.%20Wager%20-%20Research%20integrity%20report%20card%20for%20the%20UK.pdf [Google Scholar]
- World Economic Forum (WEF). 2018 . “ Code of Ethics .” https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Code_of_Ethics.pdf [Google Scholar]
Reprints and Permissions
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
You are not required to obtain permission to reuse this article in part or whole.
- More Share Options
Related research
People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.
Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.
Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations. Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.
- People also read
- Recommended articles
Your download is now in progress and you may close this window
- Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
- Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
- Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
- Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research
Login or register to access this feature
Register now or learn more
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
- View all journals
- Explore content
- About the journal
- Publish with us
- Sign up for alerts
Research articles
Recycling micro polypropylene in modified hot asphalt mixture
- Daniela Laura Buruiana
- Puiu Lucian Georgescu
- Viorica Ghisman
Multi-resonant tessellated anchor-based metasurfaces
- Cameron P. Gallagher
- Joshua K. Hamilton
Biomimetic cultivation of atrial tissue slices as novel platform for in-vitro atrial arrhythmia studies
- Jorik H. Amesz
- Natasja M. S. de Groot
- Yannick J. H. J. Taverne
Building social capital with elders’ leadership through a community hub “ Ibasho ” in the Philippines and Nepal
- Takeshi Aida
- Yasuyuki Sawada
Allergic rhinitis children with obesity are more vulnerable to air pollution: a cross sectional study
- Ruo-Ling Li
Valorification of Egyptian volcanic tuff as eco-sustainable blended cementitious materials
- Khaled E. H. Eldahroty
- A. A. Farghali
- O. A. Mohamed
Organic carbon accumulation and aggregate formation in soils under organic and inorganic fertilizer management practices in a rice–wheat cropping system
- Zhanhui Zhao
Expression of SPAG7 and its regulatory microRNAs in seminal plasma and seminal plasma-derived extracellular vesicles of patients with subfertility
- Masood Abu-Halima
- Lea Simone Becker
- Eckart Meese
Development of a nomogram for predicting 90-day mortality in patients with sepsis-associated liver injury
- Liangwen Cui
Open-label placebos—a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples
- Lukas Spille
- Johannes C. Fendel
- Stefan Schmidt
Pulmonary function in patients with transfusion-dependent thalassemia and its associations with iron overload
- Kate C. Chan
Efficacy of resistance training in hypoxia on muscle hypertrophy and strength development: a systematic review with meta-analysis
- Cristina Benavente
- Brad J. Schoenfeld
- Belén Feriche
Genome-wide identification, characterization and expression analysis of AGO, DCL, and RDR families in Chenopodium quinoa
Sympathetic neurons secrete retrogradely transported TrkA on extracellular vesicles
- Ashley J. Mason
- Austin B. Keeler
- Christopher Deppmann
The importance of high quality real-life social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic
- Maximilian Monninger
- Pascal-M. Aggensteiner
- Nathalie E. Holz
Fate of arsenicals in mice carrying the human AS3MT gene exposed to environmentally relevant levels of arsenite in drinking water
- Christelle Douillet
- Madison Miller
- Miroslav Stýblo
Factors related to hypermetabolism in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
- Asieh Mansour
- Soudabe Motamed
- Sayed Mahmoud Sajjadi-Jazi
Evaluation of two terpene-derived polymers as consolidants for archaeological wood
- Michelle Cutajar
- Susan Braovac
- Stephen E. Harding
Hard optimization problems have soft edges
- Raffaele Marino
- Scott Kirkpatrick
Standard of care drugs do not modulate activity of senescent primary human lung fibroblasts
- Stephanie Badaro-Garcia
- Miriam S. Hohmann
- Cory M. Hogaboam
Quick links
- Explore articles by subject
- Guide to authors
- Editorial policies
Javascript is currently disabled in your browser. Please enable Javascript, or use an alternative browser.
FY 2020 SC Laboratory Performance Report Cards
The FY 2020 Laboratory Performance Report Card for each Office of Science national laboratory, for the period from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020, can be viewed by clicking on the corresponding laboratory listed below:
- Ames National Laboratory
- Argonne National Laboratory
- Brookhaven National Laboratory
- Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
- Oak Ridge National Laboratory
- Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
- Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
- Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
- SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
- Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
Contact Laboratory Policy
Leaving Office of Science
The link you have requested will take you to a website outside the Office of Science.
Please click the following link to continue:
Thank you for visiting our site. We hope your visit was informative and enjoyable.
- Research & Services
- Data Products
- Sea-Level Report Cards
U.S. Sea-Level Report Cards
Trends, projections, and processes to aid coastal planning
Want to know how sea level in your area is changing due to global warming and other factors? Our 'report cards' can help. Updated by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science each year as annual tide-gauge data become available, they display recent sea-level trends and project sea-level height to the year 2050 for 32 localities along the U.S. East, Gulf, West, and Alaskan coasts.
Report Card Components
Our report cards have 3 components: the 2050 projection, recent trends in the rates of sea-level change, and an explanation of processes affecting sea level at each locality.
The annotated chart below, using the latest data from Norfolk, Virginia , briefly explains the data and statistical approaches we use in our 2050 projections. Visit an individual locality for details on all its report-card components. You can also compare sea-level trends, projections and processes among localities and by region. For full technical details, read our report .
- Sign Up Individual School
Report Card Comments & Phrases—Science
Report Card Comments & Phrases—Science
_______ demonstrates a solid understanding of science concepts at this grade level. Please continue to work on ______ nightly.
_______ has worked hard in science this quarter. However, her progress has been slower than I would have liked. Can we meet to discuss some helpful strategies?
_______ is inquisitive and highly interested in science topics.
At this point, _______ has successfully mastered the core science concepts for this grade level.
- _______ has advanced research skills and uses them very effectively in his/her work on science projects.
It would be helpful if _______ prepared and studied more diligently for science tests. I know she can put in more effort than she has been recently.
_______ is having trouble with many of the basic skills in science. Can we meet to discuss some helpful strategies?
_______ has a true enthusiasm and gift for hands-on science projects and activities. His effort is reflected in his high grade.
- _______ did an outstanding job on her science project/presentation.
- _______ should continue to practice science terms and vocabulary. Please continue to work on this nightly.
- ______ understands and applies the scientific method in his/her hands-on activities.
- The quality of _______'s science homework is inconsistent. His/her grade would improve with more consistent effort on science assignments.
- _______ understands and practices lab safety concepts and principles.
- _______ has strong analytic and problem-solving skills, and applies them effectively to science activities and assignments.
- He/she is also an excellent citizen, as he/she frequently assists other students with concepts, not answers.
Looking for more report card comment examples?
Download or purchase over 90+ pages of grading comments examples, tips, and advice for managing student grades.
View more examples
_______ has difficulty retaining science terms and concepts.
_______ understands and applies lab safety techniques.
_______ understands the scientific method and uses it to solve problems.
_______ understands and uses basic science concepts and terms to ____.
_______ is still struggling with science tests and quizzes.
_______ understands and applies scientific notation and formulas.
_______ understands and applies math and language arts concepts and skills in science class.
_______ can perform basic research and apply learning to science assignments and activities.
_______ works well independently to complete science activities.
_______ works well with other students to complete group science activities.
_______ is able to create graphs using simple data.
_______ understands several methods of graphing.
_______ is beginning to memorize the _______.
_______ knows the basic elements of the Periodic Table.
_______ still needs strengthening in the concept of _______.
_______ does not know his/her science facts well.
More Report Card Comments and Phrases.
Featured Middle School Resources
Related Resources
13+ SAMPLE Scientific Research Report in PDF | MS Word
Scientific Research Report | MS Word
13+ sample scientific research report, what is a scientific research report, the elements of a scientific research report, how to write a scientific research report, what are the types of scientific reports, what is a scientific research paper called, why is there a need to write scientific reports.
Sections in Scientific Research Report
Scientific Research Papers Report
Basic Scientific Research Report
Final Scientific Research Report
Scientific Research Reporting in PDF
Scientific Research Institute Report
Scientific Laboratory Research Report
Organizing a Scientific Research Report
Military Scientific Research Annual Report
Scientific Research Report Example
Simple Scientific Research Report
Formal Scientific Research Report
Scientific Research Grant Program Final Report Form
Authentic Science Research Report
1. consult with supervisors regarding instructions and guidelines, 2. anticipate the audience of the report, 3. outline the content and structure of the report, 4. draft the scientific report, 5. indicate the references and citations, 6. revise, edit, and correct as necessary, share this post on your network, you may also like these articles, 28+ sample behavior incident reports in pdf | ms word.
Does the person usually approach you immediately preceding the behavior? Is the behavior often connected with the termination of certain activities? Consider these questions while determining the function of…
34+ SAMPLE Customer Service Report in PDF | MS Word | Google Docs | Apple Pages
Most businesses produce items or perform services for their consumer market. Feedback from consumers is a critical component for organizations to provide quality items and services to customers. It ensures a company…
browse by categories
- Questionnaire
- Description
- Reconciliation
- Certificate
- Spreadsheet
Information
- privacy policy
- Terms & Conditions
Free Science Report Form Printables
Hero Images/Getty Images
- Becoming A Teacher
- Assessments & Tests
- Elementary Education
- Secondary Education
- Special Education
Encourage Science Exploration
Science is usually a high-interest topic for children due to their inherently curious nature. They want to know how and why things work. Science capitalizes on children's inquisitiveness to know more about the world around them. Each time they explore a scientific concept — even if they don't realize that's what they're doing — they increase their knowledge and appreciation of that world.
To motivate students to engage in scientific exploration:
- Encourage them to ask questions when they don't understand something.
- Provide lots of opportunities for hands-on exploration, such as regular nature study.
- Purchase simple science equipment and kits for your kids to explore.
- Share your own observations with your children, pointing out things such as interesting rocks, unusual insects, or a variety of birds.
- Talk about the weather and the causes of rain, snow, fog, earthquakes, or hurricanes
- Conduct your own experiments and encourage your students to record their findings
And, of course, use these free printable science forms to encourage the exploration and recording of scientific findings in your classroom or homeschool.
Science Report Form - Page 1
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/scireportform-56afe0a05f9b58b7d01e251c.png "scientific research on report cards")
Use this form as you begin to have students research the topic of their choice. Encourage your children to list new facts that they discover rather than interesting facts they already know. If they're studying an animal, for example, they may already be familiar with its physical attributes, but they may not know about its diet or natural habit.
Science Report Form - Page 2
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/scireportform2-56afe0a25f9b58b7d01e253c.png "scientific research on report cards")
Students use this science report form to draw a picture related to their topic and write a report about it. Prompt your children to be as detailed as possible in keeping with the expectations of their age and ability. If they're drawing a flower, for example, a young child might include and label the stem, flowers, and petals, while an older student might also include the stamen, anther, and filament.
Science Report Form - Page 3
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/scireportform3-56afe0a45f9b58b7d01e2552.png "scientific research on report cards")
Use this form to list the resources used for your research. The form includes blank lines for students to list books and websites. You might also have them list magazine or DVD titles, the name of a place they visited for a field trip on the topic, or the name of a person they interviewed.
Science Report Information Sheet
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/sciencereport-56afe09a5f9b58b7d01e24e5.png "scientific research on report cards")
On the previous form, the student listed the resources she used in her research. On this form, specific discoveries and interesting facts can be listed from each of those resources. If your student will be writing a report on her topic, this form is excellent for filling out as she reads (or watches a DVD or interviews someone) about each of the resources so that she can reference these sources when composing her report.
Science Experiment Form - Page 1
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/sciexperiment-56afe09c5f9b58b7d01e24fe.png "scientific research on report cards")
Use this page while conducting science experiments. Tell students to list the title of the experiment, the materials used, the questions they're hoping to answer by doing the experiment, their hypothesis (what they think will happen), and their method (what, exactly, they did for the project). This form is excellent practice for lab reports in high school.
Encourage your student to be as detailed as possible. When describing the method, prompt them to include enough detail that someone who has not done the experiment could replicate it successfully.
Science Experiment Form - Page 2
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/sciexperiment2-56afe09e3df78cf772c9c1f5.png "scientific research on report cards")
Use this form to have young learners draw a picture of the experiment, record the results, and describe what they learned.
My Skeleton Report
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/skeletonreport-56afe0a65f9b58b7d01e2566.png "scientific research on report cards")
Use this form when studying the human body. Students will do research to answer the questions and draw a picture depicting what the inside of their bodies look like.
My Animal Report - Page 1
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/animalreport-56afe0963df78cf772c9c19e.png "scientific research on report cards")
Animals are a high-interest topic for young children. Print multiple copies of this form to record facts about animals that interest your student or those you observe on your nature walks or field trips.
My Animal Report - Page 2
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/animalreport2-56afe0983df78cf772c9c1bd.png "scientific research on report cards")
Students can use this form to draw a picture of each animal that they study and record interesting facts they learned. You might want to print these pages on card stock and three-hole punch them to assemble an animal fact book in a folder or binder.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/you-re-never-too-young-to-pursue-a-love-for-science-629073806-59cbc3240d327a00113ee988.jpg "scientific research on report cards")
- Science Projects for Every Subject
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/172177554-56aff2aa5f9b58b7d01ef0da.jpg "scientific research on report cards")
By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.
Elementary Assessments
39 Helpful Science Report Card Comments
It’s report card time, and you don’t know where to start when it comes to drafting science report card comments.
You want to communicate clearly how students are performing in science class, but it isn’t always easy to brainstorm the most appropriate remarks.
So if you’re seeking quality science report card comments, you’ve come to the right place.
This collection of science report card comments solves the issue of not knowing what to write.
You’ll save lots of time and frustration.
Science Report Card Comments
No matter the grade, you’ll find the following science report card comments helpful.
- _____ puts forth a lot of effort. However, ( insert any science skill, strategy, or behavior ) is still difficult for him/her.
- _____ is exceeding in the science learning objective of ( insert any science skill or strategy) .
- Using models and graphs aids _____ in comprehending science concepts such as . . .
- _____ rarely uses nonfiction text features to aid in reading comprehension of science or social studies text.
- Though _____ is making gradual steps to improve ( insert science skill or strategy) progress is delayed due to…
- _____ has met all science standards for this quarter.
- _____ enjoys hands-on science projects.
- Even with accommodations and/or modifications, _____ struggles with ( insert any science skill or strategy ).
- _____ loves science and always looks forward to exploring new science ideas.
- Though ________ progressed well in science in previous grade levels, the depth of information and need for a much a higher level of critical thinking causes him to struggle a bit when performing science experiments.
- _____ shows a keen interest in science.
- _____ makes relevant connections when reading science texts.
- Even though _______ is very attentive in science and loves to explore new ideas, his low reading comprehension impacts how much he understands.
- _____ struggles to understand basic science concepts.
- Asks thought-provoking questions related to the subject matter at hand.
- _____ did a fantastic job presenting her research in the science fair.
- _____ expansive science vocabulary is impressive.
- _____ is progressing well in applying science inquiry skills.
- _____ lacks understanding of the steps of the scientific method .
- _____ requires repeated explanations to understand foundational scientific concepts.
- _____ is unclear how to apply the steps of the scientific method to complete an experiment.
- _____ accurately and regularly uses the scientific method to solve science problems.
- _____ is getting better at evaluating hypothesis and retesting when necessary.
- _____ When collecting resources to test her hypothesis, _______ uses a wide variety of resources.
- ______ seldom conducts science experiments using the scientific method.
- ______ effortlessly applies the scientific method with each new experiment.
- ______ is highly proficient in using research skills to carry out science investigations.
- ______ routinely executes the scientific process when conducting experiments and science projects.
- _____ does not ask for help when he or she does not understand a concept.
- Because _______ is not too interested in science, he tends not to put forth maximum effort into all the activities.
- _____ continues to make good progress in. . . ( target area ).
- Within science groups, ______ takes feedback positively and gives suggestions respectfully.
- _____ is naturally inquisitive.
- _____ takes accountability for his work.
- Science block is a time where ______ shines. Her eyes light up when doing class experiments.
- _____ consistently follows the safety guidelines when working in the science lab.
- _____ habitually shows respect for science materials.
- _____ low performance in science is due to her frequent absences from class this quarter/semester.
- _____ poor attitude affects his science performance.
Final Thoughts: Science Report Card Comments
There’s no need to start from a blank slate when drafting science report card comments.
These helpful comments for science help teachers complete remarks in less time.
- Condition of Education Digest of Education Statistics Projections of Education Statistics Topical Studies
- National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC)
- International Activities Program (IAP)
- Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS) National Household Education Survey (NHES)
- Common Core of Data (CCD) Secondary Longitudinal Studies Program Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) National Teacher and Principal Survey (NTPS) more...
- Library Statistics Program
- Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B) Career/Technical Education Statistics (CTES) Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) more...
- Common Education Data Standards (CEDS) National Forum on Education Statistics Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Grant Program - (SLDS) more...
- Distance Learning Dataset Training National Postsecondary Education Cooperative (NPEC) Statistical Standards Program more...
- Assessments K-12 Students K-12 Teachers and Faculty K-12 Schools College Students College Faculty College Institutions Mapping
- Delta Cost Project IPEDS Data Center How to apply for Restricted Use License Online Codebook
- ACS-ED Tables Data Lab Elementary Secondary Information System International Data Explorer IPEDS Data Center NAEP Data Explorer
- ACS Dashboard College Navigator Private Schools Public School Districts Public Schools Search for Schools and Colleges
- NAEP State Profiles (nationsreportcard.gov) Public School District Finance Peer Search Education Finance Statistics Center IPEDS Data Center
- NAEP Question Tool NAAL Questions Tool
- ACS-ED Dashboard ACS-ED Maps CollegeMap Locale Lookup MapEd SAFEMap School and District Navigator
- Bibliography ED Data Inventory
- Assessments Early Childhood Elementary and Secondary Postsecondary and Beyond Resources Special Topics
- Search for Schools and Colleges College Navigator Other Search Tools Public Schools Public School Districts Private Schools
- NCES Blog What's New at NCES Conferences/Training NewsFlash Funding Opportunities Press Releases StatChat
- Search Publications and Products Annual Reports Restricted-use Data Licenses Recent Publications By Subject Index A-Z By Survey & Program Areas Data Products Last 6 Months
- About NCES Commissioner Contact NCES Staff Help
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science assessment is designed to measure students’ knowledge and abilities in the areas of Earth and space science, physical science, and life science. The most recent science assessment was given in 2019 to approximately 30,400 grade 4 students, 31,400 grade 8 students, and 26,400 grade 12 students. Results for science 2019 are now available and are reported on a national level at all three grades.
Explore the Nation's Report Card
Assessment content.
The science framework specifics that students’ science knowledge and skills should be measured in three broad areas: physical science, life science, and Earth and space sciences. The framework identifies four science practices that should be assessed to determine how students use their knowledge of science, including how they identify science principles, use science principles, use scientific inquiry, and use technological design. The framework also outlines what science knowledge and skills students should have to reach NAEP Basic, NAEP Proficient, and NAEP Advanced achievement. The science assessment is administered as a digtally based assessment. Survey questionnaires, administered to students, teachers, and school administrators who participate in a science assessment, are used to collect and report contextual information about students’ K-12 education and learning experience in and out of the classroom.
How is Your State or District Performing?
How Results Are Reported
Academic achievement in science is presented in two ways on The Nations's Report Card: scale scores and NAEP achievement levels.
- Scale scores represent how students performed on the science assessment. Scores are aggregated and reported for diverse student groups for the nation, states, and districts.
- NAEP achievement levels are performance standards that describe what students should know and be able to do.
Results are reported as percentages of students performing at or above three NAEP achievement levels ( NAEP Basic , NAEP Proficient , and NAEP Advanced ). Students performing at or above the NAEP Proficient level on NAEP assessments demonstrate solid academic performance and competency over challenging subject matter. It should be noted that the NAEP Proficient achievement level does not represent grade level proficiency as determined by other assessment standards (e.g., state or district assessments).
Item maps illustrate how specific science knowledge and skills correspond to different NAEP achievement levels. Item maps answer the question, "What does it mean for students to be at NAEP Basic , NAEP Proficient , or NAEP Advanced in terms of what they know and can do?"
Science Publications
- Publications
- IES Centers
- Data Training
- School Search
- IES Policies and Standards
- ED Data Inventory
- IES Diversity Statement
- NCES Statistical Standards
- Peer Review Process
- Privacy and Security Policies
- Public Access Policy
- U.S. Department of Education
- Additional Resources
- Organizational Chart
Formatting Science Reports
This section describes an organizational structure commonly used to report experimental research in many scientific disciplines, the IMRAD format: I ntroduction, M ethods, R esults, And D iscussion.
When and when not to use the IMRAD format
Although most scientific reports use the IMRAD format, there are some exceptions.
This format is usually not used in reports describing other kinds of research, such as field or case studies, in which headings are more likely to differ according to discipline. Although the main headings are standard for many scientific fields, details may vary; check with your instructor, or, if submitting an article to a journal, refer to the instructions to authors.
Developing a Title
Titles should.
- Describe contents clearly and precisely, so that readers can decide whether to read the report
- Provide key words for indexing
Titles should NOT
- Include wasted words such as “studies on,” “an investigation of”
- Use abbreviations and jargon
- Use “cute” language
Good Titles
The Relationship of Luteinizing Hormone to Obesity in the Zucker Rat
Poor Titles
An Investigation of Hormone Secretion and Weight in Rats Fat Rats: Are Their Hormones Different?
The Abstract
The guidelines below address issues to consider when writing an abstract.
What is the report about, in miniature and without specific details?
- State main objectives. (What did you investigate? Why?)
- Describe methods. (What did you do?)
- Summarize the most important results. (What did you find out?)
- State major conclusions and significance. (What do your results mean? So what?)
What to avoid:
- Do not include references to figures, tables, or sources.
- Do not include information not in report.
Additional tips:
- Find out maximum length (may vary from 50 to 300+ words).
- Process: Extract key points from each section. Condense in successive revisions.
The Introduction
Guidelines for effective scientific report introductions.
What is the problem?
- Describe the problem investigated.
- Summarize relevant research to provide context, key terms, and concepts so your reader can understand the experiment.
Why is it important?
- Review relevant research to provide rationale. (What conflict or unanswered question, untested population, untried method in existing research does your experiment address? What findings of others are you challenging or extending?)
What solution (or step toward a solution) do you propose?
- Briefly describe your experiment: hypothesis(es), research question(s); general experimental design or method; justification of method if alternatives exist.
- Move from general to specific: problem in real world/research literature –> your experiment.
- Engage your reader: answer the questions, “What did you do?” “Why should I care?”
- Make clear the links between problem and solution, question asked and research design, prior research and your experiment.
- Be selective, not exhaustive, in choosing studies to cite and amount of detail to include. (In general, the more relevant an article is to your study, the more space it deserves and the later in the Introduction it appears.)
- Ask your instructor whether to summarize results and/or conclusions in the Introduction.
Methods Section
Below are some questions to consider for effective methods sections in scientific reports.
How did you study the problem?
- Briefly explain the general type of scientific procedure you used.
What did you use?
(May be subheaded as Materials)
- Describe what materials, subjects, and equipment (chemicals, experimental animals, apparatus, etc.) you used. (These may be subheaded Animals, Reagents, etc.)
How did you proceed?
(May be subheaded as Methods or Procedures)
- Explain the steps you took in your experiment. (These may be subheaded by experiment, types of assay, etc.)
- Provide enough detail for replication. For a journal article, include, for example, genus, species, strain of organisms; their source, living conditions, and care; and sources (manufacturer, location) of chemicals and apparatus.
- Order procedures chronologically or by type of procedure (subheaded) and chronologically within type.
- Use past tense to describe what you did.
- Quantify when possible: concentrations, measurements, amounts (all metric); times (24-hour clock); temperatures (centigrade)
- Don’t include details of common statistical procedures.
- Don’t mix results with procedures.
Results Section
The section below offers some questions asked for effective results sections in scientific reports.
What did you observe?
For each experiment or procedure:
- Briefly describe experiment without detail of Methods section (a sentence or two).
- Representative: most common
- Best Case: best example of ideal or exception
- from most to least important
- from simple to complex
- organ by organ; chemical class by chemical class
- Use past tense to describe what happened.
- Don’t simply repeat table data; select .
- Don’t interpret results.
- Avoid extra words: “It is shown in Table 1 that X induced Y” –> “X induced Y (Table 1).”
Discussion Section
The table below offers some questions effective discussion sections in scientific reports address.
What do your observations mean?
- Summarize the most important findings at the beginning.
What conclusions can you draw?
For each major result:
- Describe the patterns, principles, relationships your results show.
- Explain how your results relate to expectations and to literature cited in your Introduction. Do they agree, contradict, or are they exceptions to the rule?
- Explain plausibly any agreements, contradictions, or exceptions.
- Describe what additional research might resolve contradictions or explain exceptions.
How do your results fit into a broader context?
- Suggest the theoretical implications of your results.
- Suggest practical applications of your results?
- Extend your findings to other situations or other species.
- Give the big picture: do your findings help us understand a broader topic?
- Move from specific to general: your finding(s) –> literature, theory, practice.
- Don’t ignore or bury the major issue. Did the study achieve the goal (resolve the problem, answer the question, support the hypothesis) presented in the Introduction?
- Give evidence for each conclusion.
- Discuss possible reasons for expected and unexpected findings.
- Don’t overgeneralize.
- Don’t ignore deviations in your data.
- Avoid speculation that cannot be tested in the foreseeable future.
Academic and Professional Writing
This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.
Analysis Papers
Reading Poetry
A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis
Using Literary Quotations
Play Reviews
Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts
Incorporating Interview Data
Grant Proposals
Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics
Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing
Job Materials and Application Essays
Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs
- Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
- Guided brainstorming exercises
- Get more help with your essay
- Frequently Asked Questions
Resume Writing Tips
CV Writing Tips
Cover Letters
Business Letters
Proposals and Dissertations
Resources for Proposal Writers
Resources for Dissertators
Research Papers
Planning and Writing Research Papers
Quoting and Paraphrasing
Writing Annotated Bibliographies
Creating Poster Presentations
Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper
Thank-You Notes
Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors
Reading for a Review
Critical Reviews
Writing a Review of Literature
Scientific Reports
Scientific Report Format
Sample Lab Assignment
Writing for the Web
Writing an Effective Blog Post
Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics
- Report Card
Arctic Report Card: Update for 2016
Persistent warming trend and loss of sea ice are triggering extensive Arctic changes
2016 Arctic Report Card Home >
Archive of previous Arctic Report Cards >
2016 Headlines
Executive summary, 2016 addendum, vital signs, surface air temperature, terrestrial snow cover, greenland ice sheet, sea surface temperature, arctic ocean primary productivity, tundra greenness, ocean acidification, terrestrial carbon cycle, shrews and their parasites: small species indicate big changes, arctic change - so what: linkages and impacts, faster glaciers and the search for faster science, more information, about arctic report card 2016, report card full pdf, printable handout, authors and affiliations, graphics from climate.gov, noaa press release, photos and animations for 2016 report card, how warming affects small mammals, agu report card press conference, arctic essays.
Saturday, November 5, 2016
J. Richter-Menge 1 , J. E. Overland 2 , J. Mathis 3
1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH, USA 2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, Seattle, WA, USA 3 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Arctic Research Program, Silver Spring, MD, USA
The Arctic Report Card ( www.arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/ ) considers a range of environmental observations throughout the Arctic, and is updated annually. As in previous years, the 2016 update to the Arctic Report Card highlights the changes that continue to occur in, and among, the physical and biological components of the Arctic environmental system.
Arctic air temperatures continue to increase at double the rate of the global temperature increase. The average annual surface air temperature anomaly (+2.0° C relative to the 1981-2010 baseline) over land north of 60° N between October 2015 and September 2016 was by far the highest in the observational record beginning in 1900. This represents a 3.5° C increase since the beginning of the 20th Century. Autumn, spring and winter showed extensive positive average air temperature anomalies across the central Arctic, primarily due to southerly winds moving warm air into the Arctic from mid-latitudes. Winter air temperatures greatly exceeded the previous record, with several locations showing January temperature more than 8° C above the norm. Contrary to conditions in much of the previous decade, neutral to cold temperature anomalies occurred across the central Arctic Ocean in summer 2016.
The relatively cool summer air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean created a condition which did not support rapid summer sea ice loss. After experiencing the lowest winter maximum ice extent in the satellite record (1979-2016)—which occurred in March and was 7% below the 1981-2010 average—many anticipated a record summer minimum extent. Though no new record was set, the September 2016 Arctic sea ice minimum extent tied with 2007 for the second lowest value in the satellite record, at 33% lower than the 1981-2010 average. The sea ice cover continues to be relatively young and thin. In March 2016, multiyear ice (more than 1 year old) and first-year ice were 22% and 78% of the ice cover, respectively, compared to 45% and 55% in 1985.
As the sea ice retreats more extensively in the summer, previously ice-covered water is exposed to more solar radiation. As a result, sea surface temperature (SST) and upper ocean temperatures are increasing throughout much of the Arctic Ocean and adjacent seas. Also contributing to the increase in SST are regional air temperatures and influx of warmer water from the North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The Chukchi Sea, northwest of Alaska, and eastern Baffin Bay, off west Greenland, have the largest warming trends: ~0.5° C per decade since 1982. In August 2016, SST was up to 5° C higher than the 1982-2010 average in regions of the Barents and Chukchi seas and off the east and west coasts of Greenland.
Increasing ocean primary production (conversion of CO 2 to organic material) is also being observed as summer sea ice extent declines, related to enhanced light availability. In 2016, there were widespread positive primary production anomalies throughout the Arctic Ocean and adjacent ice-affected seas, from 5% to 19% above the 2003-2015 average in Hudson Bay and the Barents Sea, respectively. The only negative anomalies were observed in the western (North American) Arctic (-11.9%) and the Sea of Okhotsk (-1.8%). For the period 2003-2015 there are statistically significant primary production trends in the in the eastern (Eurasian) Arctic, Barents Sea, Greenland Sea, Hudson Bay and North Atlantic; the steepest trends are in the eastern Arctic (37.9% increase) and the Barents Sea (34.8% increase).
The waters of the Arctic Ocean are more prone to ocean acidification (OA) compared to the rest of the global ocean, due their cooler water temperatures and unique physical processes (e.g. the formation and melting of sea ice). Even small amounts of human-derived carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) can cause significant chemical changes that other areas do not experience. Current data indicates that certain areas of the Arctic shelves presently experience prolonged ocean acidification events in shallow bottom waters. These waters are eventually transported off the shelf. As a result, corrosive conditions have been expanding deeper into the Arctic Basin over the last several decades. The inherently short Arctic food web linkages generate an increased urgency in the need to understand the impacts of OA on the Arctic marine ecosystem.
Ice on land, as represented by the Greenland Ice Sheet, saw a continuation of the overall increasing melting trend in 2016, with enhanced melt occurring in the southwest and northeast regions. The onset of surface melt ranked 2nd (after only 2012) over the 37-year period of satellite record (1979 - 2016). The duration of the melt season lasted 30-40 days longer than usual in the northeast and 15-20 days longer along the west coast, compared to the 1981-2010 average. Consistent with the spatial distribution of melt anomalies, the largest area of relatively low albedo (a measure of surface reflectivity) was located along the southwest coast, reaching down to ~20% below the 2000-2009 average.
The spring snow cover extent (SCE) has undergone significant reductions over the period of satellite observations (which start in 1967), particularly since 2005. In 2016, new record low April and May SCE was reached for the North American Arctic. The June SCE was the 3rd lowest on record over both the North American and Eurasian sectors of the Arctic. Warming Arctic surface air temperatures have a clear influence on the timing of snow melt. However, there is also evidence of decreasing pre-melt snow mass (reflective of shallower snow) which may pre-condition the snowpack for earlier and more rapid melt in the springtime.
Satellite observations of tundra greenness (a measure of vegetation productivity and strongly correlated with above-ground biomass) are available since 1982, with 2015 being the most recent year with a complete data set. Long-term trends over this period show greening on the North Slope of Alaska, in the southern Canadian tundra, and in much of the central and eastern Siberian tundra. A decreasing trend in greenness, or "browning", is observed in western Alaska (Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta), the higher-Arctic Canadian Archipelago, and western Siberian tundra.
Warming air temperatures in the Arctic are causing normally frozen ground (permafrost) to thaw. The permafrost is carbon rich and, when it thaws, is a source of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane. Northern permafrost zone soils contain 1330-1580 billion tons organic carbon, about twice as much as currently contained in the atmosphere. Tundra ecosystems are taking up increasingly more carbon during the growing season over the past several decades, but this has been offset by increasing carbon loss during the winter. Overall, tundra appears to be releasing net carbon to the atmosphere.
Changes in the tundra environment also affect the fauna they support, causing species to shift their distributions, adapt to novel conditions, or die out. Because of this linkage, small mammals, such as shrews, and their parasites can serve as key indicators for anticipating the consequences of environmental variability and changing interactions among species. Some Arctic shrews have recently acquired new parasites indicating poleward shifts of sub-Arctic faunas, and demonstrating increases in both Arctic biodiversity and overall complexity within these novel species networks.
In summary, there are numerous and diverse signals indicating that the Arctic environmental system continues to be influenced by long-term upward trends in air temperature, modulated by natural variability in regional and seasonal anomalies ( Fig. 0.1 ). The acceleration of many of these signals, the interdependency of the physical and biological elements of the Arctic system, and the growing recognition that the Arctic is an integral part of the larger Earth system are increasing the pressure for more effective and timely communication of these scientific observations to diverse user audiences. A key to meeting this challenging goal is to more directly convey the syntheses of observations across disciplinary boundaries, to better highlight Arctic system change.
Acknowledgments
Financial support for the Arctic Report Card is provided by the Arctic Research Program in the NOAA Climate Program Office. Preparation of Arctic Report Card 2016 was directed by a U.S. inter-agency editorial team of representatives from the NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, NOAA Arctic Research Program, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. The editorial team was assisted by the Editorial Advisory Board. The 12 contributions to Arctic Report Card 2016, representing the collective effort of an international team of 61 researchers in 11 countries, are based on published and ongoing scientific research. Independent peer-review of the scientific content of Arctic Report Card 2016 was facilitated by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment (AMAP) Program of the Arctic Council.
December 6, 2016
Categories: Report Card , 2016 , About , 2016 Number of views: 15966
Focus Areas
Arctic Report Card
Tracking recent environmental changes relative to historical records
Conserving and managing our Arctic Ocean resources
Providing weather information to protect lives, property, and management
Observing the Arctic ocean and atmosphere to understand and forecast Arctic change
Providing environmental intelligence to understanding the complex Arctic system
Conserving and managing Arctic living marine resources and their habitats
ARCTIC HEADQUARTERS
Stay connected, about our organization.
Issued annually since 2006, the Arctic Report Card is a timely and peer-reviewed source for clear, reliable and concise environmental information on the current state of different components of the Arctic environmental system relative to historical records. The Report Card is intended for a wide audience, including scientists, teachers, students, decision-makers and the general public interested in the Arctic environment and science.
- NOAA Privacy Statement
- Web Accessibility Statement
- Disclaimer for External Links
- U.S. Department of Commerce
- NOAA Research
- Customer Satisfaction Survey
- Math for Kids
- Parenting Resources
- ELA for Kids
- Teaching Resources
What makes a good report card comment
Tips for writing effective report card comments, report card comments you can use today.
Giving students constructive criticism is one of the most important tasks a teacher faces. It can be difficult to know how to best communicate with a student about their progress, especially when it comes to report card comments. This guide will help you write effective report card comments that are clear, concise, and accurate. So let’s get started!
What Makes a Good Report Card Comment?
There are a few key things to keep in mind when writing report card comments . Here is what makes a good report card comment:
1. Positive and Solution-Focused
It’s important to focus on the positive when writing report card comments. For every negative comment, there should be at least two positive comments. This report card comment template is a great way to make sure you’re including both positive and negative feedback in your comments.
SplashLearn: Most Comprehensive Learning App for PreK-5
SplashLearn inspires lifelong curiosity with its game-based PreK-5 learning program loved by over 40 million children. With over 4,000 fun games and activities, it’s the perfect balance of learning and play for your little one.
2. Clear and Concise
Report card comments should be clear and concise. This means avoiding generalities and using specific, concrete examples. This will help the student (and their parents) understand what they need to work on.
3. Accurate
Report card comments should be accurate. This means making sure your comments align with the grades the student has earned. There’s no point in sugar-coating a bad grade – it will only confuse the student and their parents.
Now that we’ve gone over what makes a good report card comment let’s look at some tips for writing effective report card comments.
Tips for Writing Effective Report Card Comments
1. Use Specific, Concrete Examples
One of the most important things to do when writing report card comments is to use specific, concrete examples. This will help the student understand what they need to work on. For example, instead of saying, “______ needs to work on his behavior,” you could say, “_____ needs to work on staying seated during class.”
2. Avoid Generalities
When writing comments on a report card, it’s important to avoid generalities. For example, instead of writing “Your child is a joy to have in class,” try something more specific, such as “Your child is always willing to help out other students.” This will give the student and their family a better idea of what they’re doing well and what areas they can continue to improve in.
3. Use Positive Language
It’s essential to use positive language when writing report card comments. This means avoiding negative words like “doesn’t,” “won’t,” and “can’t.” For example, instead of writing “_____ doesn’t pay attention in class,” try “_____ is working on paying attention in class.” This small change can make a big difference in how students and their families perceive their progress.
4. Employ Sandwich Technique
The sandwich technique is a great way to deliver both positive and negative feedback in a report card comment. This means starting with a positive comment, followed by constructive criticism, and ending with another positive comment. This gives the student a sense of their progress while still providing areas for improvement.
5. Proofread Your Comments
When writing report card comments, it’s important to be clear and accurate. However, it’s also important to make sure that your comments are free of typos and grammatical errors. After all, you don’t want to give a student or their family the wrong impression about their academic progress! Make sure to proofread your comments before sending them home.
Now that we’ve gone over some tips for writing effective report card comments let’s take a look at some examples.
Example Report Card Comments
We have divided our report card comments into four categories:
1. Academic Achievement
This is for students who have performed well academically. These comments assess a student’s progress and encourage future academic success.
1. ______ is an excellent student who always comes prepared for class. He is a joy to have in class and is always willing to help out other students.
2. _______ is a smart and inquisitive student who loves to learn. She is a pleasure to have in class and is always asking questions.
3. _______ is a hard-working student who is always trying his best. This year, he has made great progress, and I’m excited to see what he does next year.
4. _______ is a gifted student who excels in all her subjects. She has a bright future ahead of her, and I’m excited to see what she accomplishes.
5. _______ is a talented student who has a real passion for learning. He is always asking questions and is eager to get his hands on new material.
2. Partially Meeting Expectations
This is for students who are partially meeting expectations academically.
1. _______ is an intelligent student who has great potential. He needs to work on staying focused in class and following directions.
2. _______ is a hard-working student who is making progress. She need to work on ___________ and ___________.
3. _______ has moments of greatness, but he needs to be more consistent with his effort and focus.
4. _______ is a bright student, but she needs to learn to apply herself more consistently.
5. _______ is a hard worker, but he needs to improve his organizational skills.
3. Social/Emotional Development
This is for students who are developing well socially and emotionally .
1. _______ is a kind and caring student who always looks out for others. He is a good friend to all and is always willing to help.
2. _______ has made great strides in his/her social development this year. She is more confident and able to express herself well.
3. _______ works well with others and is able to take turns and share.
4. _______ is a leader among his/her peers and is often looked up to by other students.
5. _______ is an independent thinker who is not afraid to express his/her opinions.
4. General Development
This is for students who are developing well academically, socially, and emotionally.
1. _______ has made great strides in his/her development this year. He is more confident and independent and is doing well academically.
2. _______ is a happy and thriving student who loves school. She is making friends and doing well academically.
3. _______ is a well-rounded student who is doing well in all areas. He is a good friend, does his best in school, and loves to learn.
4. _______ is a joy to have in class. She is polite, hard-working, and always has a smile on her face.
5. _______ is a model student who always puts his best foot forward. He is a role model to others and sets a good example for all to follow.
Let’s Grade!
Now that we have gone over some tips for writing effective report card comments and examples of what to write, it’s time to get started on those report cards! We hope this guide has been helpful and wish you the best of luck in the new school year.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What should i do if i’m having trouble coming up with something to write.
If you’re struggling to come up with something to write, try focusing on the positive. Instead of starting with what the student needs to work on, start with what the student is doing well. This will help you brainstorm some ideas of things to say. You can also ask other teachers or the student’s parents for input.
Can I use report card comments from other sources?
While you can use comments from other sources as inspiration, you must take the time to personalize each comment. This way, the student and their family will know that you took the time to write something specifically for them.
What if I need to give a student negative feedback?
If you need to give a student negative feedback, it’s essential to be clear, concise, and constructive. For example, instead of writing “________ is lazy and doesn’t do his work,” try “________ needs to work on being more diligent with his schoolwork.” It’s also important to balance any negative comments with positive ones. This way, the student and their family will know that you still see potential and are invested in their success.
Do I need to write a comment for every subject?
While you don’t need to write a comment for every subject, it’s generally a good idea to do so. This way, the student and their family will have a complete picture of their progress. If you’re short on time, try focusing on the subjects that the student is struggling in or that you feel are most important.
What is the best way to end a report card comment?
The best way to end a report card comment is with a statement of hope or encouragement. For example, you could write, “I’m looking forward to seeing ________ progress in the second half of the year” or “I know that ________ can reach his/her goals if he/she continues to work hard.”
Most Popular
50 Best Riddles for Kids of all Grades (With Answers)!
40 Best Good Vibes Quotes to Help You Better Your Day
10 Best Classic Fairy Tales For Your Kids’ Early Development
Recent posts.
25 Best Educational Toys for Kids That All Parents Need To...
13 Best 1st Grade Homeschool Curriculum for your Child
About SplashLearn
Enter the Splashverse! Inspire lifelong curiosity with this game-based PreK-5 learning experience loved by over 40 million children. SplashLearn is the perfect balance of learning and game-play that your little one needs to build math and reading confidence.
- Games for Kids
- Worksheets for Kids
- Math Worksheets
- ELA Worksheets
- Math Vocabulary
- Number Games
- Addition Games
- Subtraction Games
- Multiplication Games
- Division Games
- Addition Worksheets
- Subtraction Worksheets
- Multiplication Worksheets
- Division Worksheets
- Times Tables Worksheets
- Reading Games
- Writing Games
- Phonics Games
- Sight Words Games
- Letter Tracing Games
- Reading Worksheets
- Writing Worksheets
- Phonics Worksheets
- Sight Words Worksheets
- Letter Tracing Worksheets
- Prime Number
- Order of Operations
- Long multiplication
- Place value
- Parallelogram
- SplashLearn Success Stories
- SplashLearn Apps
- [email protected]
© Copyright - SplashLearn
Press Release
This market report on scientific research services provides broad description of the this industry.
- Facebook icon
- Twitter icon
- Linkedin icon
- Flipboard icon
- Resize icon
The MarketWatch News Department was not involved in the creation of this content.
Mar 02, 2023 (Prime PR Wire via Comtex) -- The " Scientific Research Services Market " report draws on various inferences to analyze the challenges within the industry. The final draught highlights the industry's typical problems as well as the businesses facing them. This report is of 187 pages.
Scope of the Report
A crucial part of the research project is the report's scope, which specifies the particular market segments that the Scientific Research Services report will concentrate on. The parameters for the research are established by the report's scope, which also aids in defining the goals of the investigation. The content scope and the geographic scope are the two main divisions of the scope of the Scientific Research Services market research report.
The report's content scope describes the specific facets of the Scientific Research Services market that it will cover. This could involve elements like market size, segmentation, trends, chances, difficulties, and competitor analysis. A road map for the research process is provided by the content scope, which also aids in defining the research question. Geographic scope refers to the geographical area that the report will cover. An example of this might be a particular area, nation, or even the entire world. The geographic scope aids in defining the report's target audience and the necessary level of detail. The temporal scope of the Scientific Research Services report, which refers to the time period it will cover, may be included in addition to the content and geographic scope. It's possible that this refers to a specific time in the past, present, or future.
Get a Sample PDF of the Report - https://www.reliableresearchreports.com/enquiry/request-sample/934447
The global Scientific Research Services market size is projected to reach multi million by 2030, in comparision to 2021, at unexpected CAGR during 2023-2030 (Ask for Sample Report).
What is Scientific Research Services?
Scientific Research Services refer to businesses and organizations that provide research and development services to academic institutions, government agencies, and private companies. These services include laboratory testing, experimental design and analysis, and consulting in fields such as biotechnology, chemistry, and engineering. The Scientific Research Services market is poised for growth due to rising demand for advanced scientific research to drive innovation and creativity in various industries. Increasing government funding for research and development initiatives, along with the emergence of big data analytics and artificial intelligence, is expected to further fuel the growth of the Scientific Research Services market.
Market Segmentation Analysis
Scientific Research Services market types are categorized into three segments: software, hardware, and services. The software segment includes various analytical and research software such as bioinformatics, genomics, proteomics, and data analysis. The hardware segment comprises advanced equipment used in scientific research such as imaging systems, mass spectrometry, and flow cytometry. The services segment includes contract research and outsourcing services.
The Scientific Research Services market applications are vast and range from diverse industries that include the pharmaceutical industry, biotechnology, medical device industry, agriculture, government, cosmetic companies, and many more. The pharmaceutical industry is a significant consumer of scientific research services to discover new drugs and to conduct clinical trials. Biotechnology companies use these services to develop molecular diagnostics, genomics, and personalized medicine. Similarly, the medical device industry uses them to develop new medical devices, testing and regulatory compliance, and monitoring purposes. The agricultural industry relies on scientific research services for crop improvement and food safety testing. The government utilizes these services for scientific research projects and policy development. Finally, cosmetic companies use scientific research services to formulate and test cosmetic ingredients and products.
Scientific Research Services Market Regional Analysis
Scientific Research Services are utilized in various regions across the globe to facilitate research and development activities in industries such as healthcare, biotechnology, and pharmaceuticals. In North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific, these services are widely used to conduct clinical trials, develop new medicines and devices, and carry out scientific studies. In Latin America and the Middle East & Africa, there is a growing demand for these services as the region's scientific infrastructure continues to develop.
Top Featured Companies Dominating the Global Scientific Research Services Market
Scientific research services companies such as PPD, ICON, and IQVIA provide a wide range of services including clinical trials, regulatory affairs, and laboratory testing. These services are essential for the pharmaceutical and biotech industry, enabling them to bring new treatments and drugs to market. By providing expertise, infrastructure, and technology to these companies, scientific research services companies play a vital role in accelerating drug development and reducing costs. As the demand for new treatments grows, these companies are poised to help drive growth in the scientific research services market.
- Syneos Health
- WuXi AppTec
- Charles River
- Avista Healthcare Public
- Merck Millipore Sigma
Inquire or Share Your Questions If Any Before Purchasing This Report - https://www.reliableresearchreports.com/enquiry/pre-order-enquiry/934447
Scientific Research Services Market Dynamics ( Drivers, Restraints, Opportunity, Challenges)
The Scientific Research Services market is subject to various forces that can impact its growth and development. These forces can be categorized into drivers, restraints, opportunities, and challenges. Drivers of the Scientific Research Services market include factors such as increasing adoption of the technology, growing demand from various end-use industries, and advancements in the related technologies. Restraints of the Scientific Research Services market include factors such as high costs associated with research and development, and lack of awareness about the technology among potential users. Opportunities for the Scientific Research Services market include expansion into new geographic regions and industries and the development of new applications for the technology.
Challenges for the Scientific Research Services market include intense competition from other technologies, and the need to continuously innovate and improve the technology in order to stay ahead of the competition. In terms of the company, the key drivers for the company include increasing adoption of its products and services, and partnerships and collaborations with other industry players. The key restraint for the company is the intense competition in the market, while opportunities for growth include expansion into new geographic regions and industries and the development of new products and services.
The Impact of Covid-19 and Russia-Ukraine War on Scientific Research Services Market
The Post Covid-19 Pandemic and Russia-Ukraine War have had adverse impacts on the Scientific Research Services market. Due to the large-scale disruption caused by the pandemic, many research institutions faced a shortage of funds, resources, and personnel. Besides, the imposition of travel restrictions and the closure of international borders hampered the movement of researchers, thereby affecting research collaborations and partnerships.
Similarly, the Russia-Ukraine war has also impacted the market, with research institutions located in the affected regions facing significant challenges. The conflict has caused a loss of resources, talent, and infrastructure, hindering the growth of scientific research services in the region.
Overall, both events have resulted in a significant slowdown of scientific research services market growth, which is likely to continue until the situation stabilizes. However, with the availability of vaccines and improving political conditions, the market may gradually recover in the coming years.
Get Covid-19 Impact Analysis for the market research report - https://www.reliableresearchreports.com/enquiry/request-covid19/934447
The Scientific Research Services market research report contains the following TOC:
- Report Overview
- Global Growth Trends
- Competition Landscape by Key Players
- Data by Type
- Data by Application
- North America Market Analysis
- Europe Market Analysis
- Asia-Pacific Market Analysis
- Latin America Market Analysis
- Middle East & Africa Market Analysis
- Key Players Profiles Market Analysis
- Analysts Viewpoints/Conclusions
Read full TOC - https://www.reliableresearchreports.com/toc/934447#tableofcontents
Market Segmentation 2023 - 2030:
The worldwide Scientific Research Services market is categorized by Product Type and Product Application.
In terms of Product Type, the Scientific Research Services market is segmented into:
I n terms of Product Application, the Scientific Research Services market is segmented into:
- Pharmaceutical Industry
- Biotechnology
- Medical Device Industry
- Agriculture
- Cosmetic Companies
The available Scientific Research Services Market Players are listed by region as follows:
- United States
- South Korea
- China Taiwan
- Argentina Korea
Purchase this Report (Price 3900 USD for a Single-User License) - https://www.reliableresearchreports.com/purchase/934447
Reasons to Purchase the Scientific Research Services Market Research Report:
- In addition to details on its marketing strategies, corporate growth, overall structure, and organizational setup, the Scientific Research Services research report gives an overview of the Scientific Research Services company.
- The Scientific Research Services company also helps its customers understand how the Covid-19 Pandemic is having an effect on the market and how that market is likely to grow as the virus's effects fade.
- The report's main topic is how top competitors use forecasted data, market drivers, and trends to reshape the global market.
- The report includes crucial buyer information, including business assessments and financial data.
- The report of the Scientific Research Services company has a truly global perspective because it is the most comprehensive study of this market and covers numerous geographies, current affairs, and potential future developments.
- In order to predict and advance industrial conduct, the research study Scientific Research Services includes a number of key parameters and projections for essential variables.
As an AI language model, I can provide the top 6 questions that may arise while researching the scientific research services market research. However, I can not answer in a specified word count. Some of the top 6 questions that may be answered in the research are:
1. What is the market size and growth rate of the scientific research services market?
2. What are the major factors driving the demand for scientific research services?
3. Who are the key players in the scientific research services market?
4. What are the latest trends observed in the scientific research services market?
5. What are the major challenges faced by service providers in the scientific research market?
6. Which regions are expected to show high growth potential in the scientific research services market?
Contact Us:
Name: Mahesh Patel
Phone: USA:+1 951 407 0500
Email: [email protected]
Website: https://www.reliableresearchreports.com/
More Reports Published By Us:
Company Name: Reliable Research Reports
Global Real Estate Services Market Size, Status and Forecast 2023-2027
Global Real Estate & Property Management Services Market Size, Status and Forecast 2023-2027
Global Virtual Currency (e-Money) Market Size, Status and Forecast 2023-2027
Global Biological Control Market Size, Status and Forecast 2023-2027
Press Release Distributed by Prime PR Wire
To view the original version on Prime PR Wire visit This market report on Scientific Research Services provides broad description of the this industry
COMTEX_425795449/2788/2023-03-02T15:07:14
Partner Center
Most popular.
‘The U.S. housing market is crumbling under the weight of higher mortgage rates and rock-bottom affordability’: Prices fell the most in these U.S. states
‘Am I crazy?’ After my mother died, my cousin took her designer purse, and my aunt took 8 paintings from her home — then things really escalated
‘we live in purgatory’: my wife has a multimillion-dollar trust fund, but my mother-in-law controls it. we earn $400,000 and spend beyond our means. what’s our next move.
Life’s a beach for this Florida FIRE couple
Medicare just crushed the hopes of 750,000 Alzheimer’s patients a year
Advertisement, search results, private companies, recently viewed tickers, no recent tickers.
Visit a quote page and your recently viewed tickers will be displayed here.
Now you can see non-English news...
(Voice of the two sessions) Shan Yang, President of Hunan Academy of Agricultural Sciences: Bringing the latest "transcript" of hybrid rice to the meeting
2023-03-04T13:30:33.977Z
"Shan Yang, member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, and president of the Hunan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, who is attending the first meeting of the 14th National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference in Beijing, brought the latest "report card" on the research and promotion of hybrid rice." Shan Yang listed one A series of scientific research results: In 2022, the yield of "157" strain and "X56" strain of Xing'an League will reach 717.56 kg and 702.5 kg per mu in soda saline-alkali land respectively; the yield of Shuangliangyou 138 will reach 412.1 kg per mu in a large area of coastal saline land.
China News Agency, Beijing, March 4th (Reporter Tang Xiaoqing) "We are continuing to inherit and carry forward the career left by Mr. Yuan Longping." Member of the CPPCC National Committee, academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, Hunan Province, who is participating in the first session of the 14th CPPCC National Committee in Beijing Shan Yang, dean of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, brought the latest "transcript" on the promotion of hybrid rice research.
"In order to continue to make hybrid rice a global leader and continue to make greater contributions to national food security, our efforts have not stopped." Shan Yang said, the State Key Laboratory of Hybrid Rice jointly established by Hunan Hybrid Rice Research Center and Wuhan University , Major breakthroughs have been made in the research of hybrid rice variety selection, salt-alkali-tolerant hybrid rice yield, and third-generation hybrid rice.
According to reports, in 2022, the Shuangliangyou 132 cultivated by the Hunan Hybrid Rice Research Center will produce 459.07 kilograms per mu in a large area of 156 mu in Jianning County, Sanming City, Fujian Province, realizing the largest hybrid rice seed production in China. Yield breakthrough; "Shuang 1S", an important achievement in the research and practice of hybrid rice seed production, created the highest record of average yield per 100 mu in hybrid rice seed production.
"Mr. Yuan's dream of growing high-yield rice on saline-alkali land in China is also becoming a reality." Shan Yang listed a series of scientific research results: In 2022, the yield per mu of the "157" strain and "X56" strain of Xing'an League in soda saline-alkali land will respectively reach 717.56 kilograms and 702.5 kilograms; Shuangliangyou 138 has a large area of 412.1 kilograms per mu in salty coastal tidal flats.
Yuan Longping's innovation team has cultivated new saline-alkali products such as Jingliangyou 326, Jingyou 007, and Shuangliangyou 138, which can withstand 3‰ saline concentration during the whole growth period and have a yield of more than 400 kg per mu.
"The strength of the innovation team is also strengthening." Shan Yang told reporters that Xie Daoxin, academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and professor of Tsinghua University, has built his only academician workstation in the Hunan Academy of Agricultural Sciences; Sun Chuanqing, a professor of China Agricultural University, was hired as a national key experiment of hybrid rice Office Executive Director.
The high-yield breakthrough of super hybrid rice has also been fruitful.
Last year, the Hunan Hybrid Rice Research Center arranged 7 research bases for double-cropping rice yielding 3,000 catties per mu and 4 research bases for one-cropping rice yielding 1,200 kg per mu in China.
Among them, the super hybrid rice Zhuoliangyou 1126 has an actual yield of 1,211.15 kg per mu in the demonstration base in Mengzi City, Honghe Prefecture, Yunnan Province.
"Teacher Yuan's dream of covering the world with hybrid rice is also continuing." Shan Yang revealed that so far, nearly 40 countries around the world have carried out research and demonstration of hybrid rice.
India, Vietnam, the Philippines, Bangladesh and other countries have successfully commercialized hybrid rice production.
At present, the annual planting area of foreign hybrid rice has reached 7 million hectares.
Among them, the Hybrid Rice Africa Branch Center has cultivated 5 hybrid rice varieties approved by the Madagascar government.
Last year, China and Madagascar marked the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations, and the bottom of the official logo features rice ears design elements.
Shan Yang believes that the promotion of hybrid rice in Madagascar has provided "Chinese technology" and "Chinese experience" for countries around the world to achieve food security.
Source: chinanews
All business articles on 2023-03-04
You may like
© Communities 2019 - Privacy
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The relationship of the findings to the meaningfulness of the information typically found on report cards is discussed, and suggestions are offered for improving the validity of the inferences parents make from report cards.
Why Do So Few Consumers Use Health Care Quality Report Cards? A Framework for Understanding the Limited Consumer Impact of Comparative Quality Information 10 May 2018 | Medical Care Research and ...
STANDARDS-BASED REPORT CARDS EFFECT ACHIEVEMENT 9 the expansion of the use of standards-based report cards to the secondary level in public schools. While many elementary schools in the state of Massachusetts have adopted standards-based report cards, few secondary schools have embarked on the process. As district leaders prepare to
Download Citation | On Jan 1, 2004, William T. Gormley published Using Organizational Report Cards | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
When students, their parents, teachers, and principals participate in the Nation's Report Card—the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America's students know and can do in various subject areas—they are helping to inform decisions about how to improve the education system in our country.
RI and RE Country Report Cards can be a tool to monitor, compare, and strengthen RE and integrity across countries through empowerment and inspiration by examples of good practices and developed systems. KEYWORDS: Research integrity responsible conduct of research country report cards research integrity framework research integrity governance
Investigation of the effective atomic number dependency on kinetic energy using collision stopping powers for electrons, protons, alpha, and carbon particles. Peiman Rezaeian. Sedigheh Kashian ...
Report cards provide parents and guardians with essential information regarding their child's progress in school. Besides a letter grade, parents are given a brief descriptive comment that elaborates the student's strengths or what the student needs to improve upon. Finding the exact words to describe a meaningful comment takes effort.
The FY 2020 Laboratory Performance Report Card for each Office of Science national laboratory, for the period from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020, can be viewed by clicking on the corresponding laboratory listed below: Ames National Laboratory. Argonne National Laboratory. Brookhaven National Laboratory.
Want to know how sea level in your area is changing due to global warming and other factors? Our 'report cards' can help. Updated by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science each year as annual tide-gauge data become available, they display recent sea-level trends and project sea-level height to the year 2050 for 32 localities along the U.S. East, Gulf, West, and Alaskan coasts.
Save time and speed up your report card writing process using these suggested comments and phrases for science. Appropriate for all grade levels, the comments and phrases can be edited or modified to suit every student in your class. Grades: Pre-K | K | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 Subjects: Science + show tags Add to Favorites Print
A scientific research report is a document that contains all the information about experimental investigations. It describes the processes and progress of scientific research, including its results and the state of the research problem.
Students use this science report form to draw a picture related to their topic and write a report about it. Prompt your children to be as detailed as possible in keeping with the expectations of their age and ability.
This collection of science report card comments solves the issue of not knowing what to write. You'll save lots of time and frustration. Science Report Card Comments No matter the grade, you'll find the following science report card comments helpful. _____ puts forth a lot of effort.
Explore the Nation's Report Card National Achievement Survey Questionnaires Findings Assessment Content The science framework specifics that students' science knowledge and skills should be measured in three broad areas: physical science, life science, and Earth and space sciences.
This section describes an organizational structure commonly used to report experimental research in many scientific disciplines, the IMRAD format: Introduction, Methods, Results, And Discussion. Although the main headings are standard for many scientific fields, details may vary; check with your instructor, or, if submitting an article to a journal, refer to the instructions to authors.…
BRCs have proved to be a useful tool in a wide variety of ages, settings, and populations [21,18,19,22] . Daily report cards can be employed to improve a wide range of academic and social ...
The 12 contributions to Arctic Report Card 2016, representing the collective effort of an international team of 61 researchers in 11 countries, are based on published and ongoing scientific research. Independent peer-review of the scientific content of Arctic Report Card 2016 was facilitated by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment (AMAP ...
These comments assess a student's progress and encourage future academic success. 1. ______ is an excellent student who always comes prepared for class. He is a joy to have in class and is always willing to help out other students. 2. _______ is a smart and inquisitive student who loves to learn.
The global Scientific Research Services market size is projected to reach multi million by 2030, in comparision to 2021, at unexpected CAGR during 2023-2030 (Ask for Sample Report).
Shan Yang listed one A series of scientific research results: In 2022, the yield of "157" strain and "X56" strain of Xing'an League will reach 717.56 kg and 702.5 kg per mu in soda saline-alkali land respectively; the yield of Shuangliangyou 138 will reach 412.1 kg per mu in a large area of coastal saline land. ... brought the latest "report ...