Conference Agenda

Institutional Research Ethics Committees (IRECs)—known as Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in the U.S. context—are key governance bodies “responsible for safeguarding the rights, safety, and well-being of the research subjects” (CIOMS, 2002, p. 25). While IRECs or IRBs are well-established structures in many high-income countries, they remain emergent in much of the Global South, including many post-Soviet states. In these contexts, human research ethics policies are either newly introduced or underdeveloped, leaving researchers to rely on personal ethical judgment rather than formalized institutional procedures (Dranseika, 2011; Famenka, 2011; Famenka, 2016; Silverman et al., 2015; Chenneville et al., 2016; Abdulrahman & Nair, 2017; Phoomirat et al., 2022; Fakhradiyev et al., 2024).

In many post-socialist contexts, including Central Asia, social science research is often perceived with suspicion—sometimes even as inspection or espionage (Central Eurasian Studies Society, 2016; Berezniova, 2017; Bogachenko, 2017). This perception reflects a broader reality: research culture remains underdeveloped, and conducting studies can be seen as inherently risky for both participants and researchers (Merril & Whitsel, 2017). What is clear is that these contexts urgently need systematic inquiry into ethical dilemmas and the development of research cultures that protect not only participants’ rights but also researchers’ safety and integrity.

The roots of this situation lie partly in the Soviet legacy, where social science research was often discouraged for ideological reasons (Connelly, 2014; Kuzhabekova, 2015). This suppression contributed to decades of stagnation in the social sciences and weakened traditions of inquiry in these fields. As a result, social science research ethics has remained peripheral—rarely considered in a structured or systematic way. One of the most visible indicators of this is the absence or underdeveloped institutionalization of human research ethics structures in many higher education institutions across post-socialist countries, including Kazakhstan (Jonbekova, 2020; Ahn & Shegebayev, 2017). This lack of formal mechanisms undermines both the quality and the ethical grounding of research, leaving institutions ill-prepared to protect human subjects and to support responsible research practices.

Today, as research increasingly takes place in the context of rapid technological and artificial intelligence development (Oliveira et al., 2024; Zou & Huang, 2023) and the rising requirement to conduct research and publish it, the need to strengthen academic and research ethics—particularly human research ethics—is becoming especially pressing in the context (Ispambetova et al., under review). Universities in the context are expected to uphold international ethical standards, yet many lack the institutional capacity, policies, and expertise to do so (Sagitova et al., 2024). This underscores the urgent need to establish and strengthen institutional mechanisms that can ensure ethical oversight, protect research participants, and support researchers in meeting international ethical standards.

The purpose of this action research study is to understand how IREC policy is being implemented at one university in Kazakhstan and to produce practical knowledge and strategies that will improve the IREC’s implementation and operation at the university. The study will be guided by the following research questions:

1. What are university stakeholders’ (leadership, IREC members, faculty, and students) experiences in implementing IREC policy?
2. What strategies can be developed or adapted to strengthen the IREC’s implementation and ensure its sustainable operation at the university?

By addressing these questions, this study aims to contribute to building ethical research capacity that is not only critical for protecting participants but also essential for fostering a robust, innovative, and globally engaged research culture in Kazakhstan.

Shaping academic mobility: A structuration perspective on Pakistani PhD Students at Chinese universities"

Abstract: The globalization of higher education has positioned student mobility as central to 21st-century academia, enabling transnational career trajectories. This study examines Pakistani PhD students in Chinese universities an under-researched phenomenon through Giddens' Structuration Theory, analyzing how structural and agency factors shape mobility decisions. Employing a qualitative methodology, the research utilizes semi-structured interviews subjected to thematic analysis. Structural factors include Political Structures encompassing constraining and enabling dynamics between Pakistan’s instability and China’s stability, alongside regional marginalization that reinforces spatial inequities. These are complemented by Professional Factors such as research infrastructure and skills transferability, and Institutional Factors including financial and administrative enablers like scholarships and visa access, as well as flexible doctoral admissions policies. Socio-cultural factors further shape the structural landscape. In terms of agency, Personal Factors such as career pragmatism, Credentialism, transnational degree valuation, and international exposure through peer networks interact with Educational Factors including research interests and institutional reputation. The study demonstrates that Pakistan's structural constraints limit opportunities, while China's enabling environment facilitates academic mobility. The PhD sojourn transforms students academically, professionally, and personally, fostering cosmopolitan identities. Mobility outcomes depend on the intersection of national capacity and individual agency. Chinese universities serve as platforms for career advancement, contrasting with Pakistan's systemic limitations on doctoral pursuits. The findings propose the concept of "contingent mobility" to capture Pakistani students' complex trajectories neither wholly voluntary nor forced, but emerging from structural precarity in Pakistan's higher education system, China's strategic internationalization policies, and students' tactical agency through credential accumulation and network building.

Keywords: Academic mobility, Structuration, Pakistani Ph.D. students.

Research skills refer to a set of interrelated abilities that enable individuals to conduct research in an effective and rigorous manner. These include the capacity to formulate meaningful research questions, systematically collect and analyse data, select and apply appropriate methodological approaches, critically interpret findings, communicate results clearly, and make informed decisions grounded in empirical evidence (Jeréz et al., 2022). Accordingly, students must develop an understanding of their disciplinary field and engage in scientific inquiry as a means of knowledge construction and innovation (Visser-Wijnveen et al., 2015; Gess et al., 2018; Salmento et al., 2021). Research skills should therefore represent a core pillar of university education, particularly in the preparation of future education professionals. The development of critical, reflective, and self-regulated thinking is essential for meaningful engagement with educational practice and research, and presupposes a solid understanding of how knowledge is produced, validated, and communicated (Murtonen, 2015; Wilson et al., 2016). In Educational Sciences, research competence is especially crucial for addressing the complex and evolving challenges of professional practice and for empowering future generations to value research as a driver of modern societies (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005).

Munthe and Rogne (2015) emphasised that research competence must be developed during initial university training, as it forms the foundation for evidence-based professional practice. The mastery of research skills contributes not only to individual academic and professional development, but also to broader societal progress. In this context, universities play a central role in preparing students to respond to the rapid transformations generated by scientific, technological, and innovation-driven change, equipping them to address complex professional challenges within increasingly dynamic social environments (Casanova et al., 2024). Previous research indicates that research-oriented undergraduate courses and experiences are strongly associated with higher research self-efficacy, the formation of scientific identity, and increased interest in pursuing graduate and doctoral research paths, particularly when such experiences are sustained, well-mentored, and meaningfully integrated (Fernandez et al., 2024).

Within this framework, this study aims to examine how research competences are acquired among undergraduate students in the field of Education Sciences within European higher education. The question of whether undergraduates in Education Sciences possess weaker research skills than students in other disciplines remains contested. While research competence is essential for academic success and evidence-based professional practice, studies indicate mixed results. Education Sciences students often demonstrate strengths in reflective thinking and communication, but comparatively weaker scientific content knowledge, methodological rigor, and data analysis skills. These differences, however, are not uniform and are strongly influenced by curricular design, institutional context, and individual motivation (Salmento et al., 2021, Matjašič & Vogrinc, 2025).

This study draws on the RMRC-K model of research competences developed by Böttcher and Thiel, which conceptualises research competence as a multidimensional construct encompassing skills in Reviewing the state of research, Methodological skills, Reflection on research findings, Communication skills, and content Knowledge (Böttcher & Thiel, 2018). This framework is used to analyse curricula and course syllabi in Educational Sciences bachelor programmes.

This study focuses on two institutional contexts: universities belonging to the CIVIS European University Alliance and the top five European universities ranked by Times Higher Education according to indicators of Research Environment and Research Quality.

This model is employed as a multidimensional framework for curriculum analysis, while a Delphi expert panel will be used to explore guidelines oriented to foster the research competence among education science undergraduates. The study seeks to answer how curricula structure the progressive acquisition of these competences and what patterns and trends emerge when courses are mapped, and how experts involved in undergraduate research teaching and supervision evaluate current approaches and propose guidelines for a more coherent cross-European research-methods education.

Many doctoral students conducting qualitative research encounter difficulties selecting appropriate research methods and instruments. These demands are complicated by time constraints and inconsistent supervisory support. Although pilot studies are commonly recommended as a practical strategy for refining study designs, their role and value in phenomenological inquiry have received limited attention in the literature (Moustakas, 1994; Finlay, 2002). This proposal investigates the value of phenomenological pilot studies by reflecting on the researcher’s experiences in a mixed-methods doctoral project focused on teacher professional development.

"Pilot studies have useful functions in conducting qualitative research, but they have attracted scant attention in literature" (Kim, 2010, p. 191). For novice researchers, pilot studies can be a great way to work through uncertainties before committing to a full trial. They offer hands-on experience, close gaps in supervision or training, and shape a research identity (O'Cathain et al., 2015; Malmqvist et al., 2019). These small studies are useful for refining research designs and testing participant recruitment strategies (Lancaster et al., 2004; Kraemer et al., 2006).

Notwithstanding these benefits, reports documenting practical challenges and lessons from pilot studies remain scarce (van Teijlingen et al., 2001). Many researchers are unsure about how to measure the success of a pilot study. This leads to missed opportunities for improvement. This paper addresses this gap by proposing an evidence-based framework for assessing pilot study effectiveness in qualitative doctoral research.

The study examines the use of pilot studies in two distinct European educational contexts. Finland, which has a systematic approach to teacher professional development, has established a global reputation as a model educational system. Its research community has evolved from adopting international best practices to becoming "more a giving partner than a receiving one" (Sahlberg, 2021, p. 242). The Czech Republic has been strengthening its recent educational policies. This pairing enables the examination of how pilot study challenges manifest differently in a mature professional development system compared to a developing one. The cross-national aspect required considering linguistic and cultural factors during the pilot phase. This was especially relevant for communication norms related to recruiting teachers. This work informs European discussions about doctoral education and teacher professional development by addressing methodological preparation gaps in diverse doctoral training environments and aligning with EU policy priorities for strengthening teacher professional learning across member states (European Commission, 2020).

This study contributes to cross-national phenomenological pilot studies in European educational research, investigating how cultural, linguistic, and educational system differences impact the design and outcomes of pilot studies. This approach closes a gap in the current literature. The analysis reveals three key cross-cultural challenges: culturally specific recruitment trust patterns, linguistic bracketing requirements, and the influence of national professional development systems on teachers' professional identity. In addition to cross-cultural insights, this study redefines pilot studies as environments in which researchers cultivate their research identity.

The analysis demonstrates how pilot studies serve a compensatory pedagogical function in European doctoral programmes with limited formal methods training, a role overlooked in pilot study literature. Supervisors can enhance doctoral students' pilot study experiences by providing structured support through regular check-ins, targeted feedback, and peer collaboration, thereby strengthening both methodological rigour and researcher identity.

The following research question guided the analysis: How do phenomenological pilot studies function as sites of both methodological refinement and researcher identity development in doctoral mixed-methods research on teacher professional development?

Pilot study objectives are:

1. Develop and pilot core qualitative research procedures.

2. Test and refine participant recruitment strategies.

3. Design and refine the interview protocol through piloting.

4. Evaluate the feasibility of the transcription process and phenomenological

analysis approach.

5. Reflect on the pilot study and document the lessons learnt.