Research Experiences for All Undergraduate Students? Building a More Equitable and Inclusive Office of Undergraduate Research at a Land-Grant Institution

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 38-47
Author(s):  
Sophie Pierszalowski ◽  
Francesca Smith ◽  
Daniel López-Cevallo
2016 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 448-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arundhati Bakshi ◽  
Lorelei E. Patrick ◽  
E. William Wischusen

There have been many calls to make research experiences available to more undergraduate students. One way to do this is to provide course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), but providing these on a scale large enough to accommodate many students can be a daunting undertaking. Indeed, other researchers have identified time to develop materials and course size as significant barriers to widespread implementation of CUREs. Based on our own experiences implementing CUREs at a large research university, we present a flexible framework that we have adapted to multiple research projects, share class materials and rubrics we have developed, and suggest logistical strategies to lower these implementation barriers.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaye D. Ceyhan ◽  
John W. Tillotson

Abstract Background Prior research reported that motivational beliefs that individuals attach to specific tasks predict continuing interest and persistence in the task. A motivational approach may be particularly useful for understanding undergraduate students’ engagement with research in their first and second years in college. The current study utilizes the expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation to qualitatively explore how much and in what ways early year undergraduate researchers value their research experience and what kinds of costs they associate with it. Results The results revealed that intrinsic value had the highest expression in participants’ motivation to engage in research. The second most expressed value type was the utility value of undergraduate research with regards to obtaining the desired outcomes, and attainment value played the least important role in participants’ motivation to engage in research. Findings also indicated that some of the participants associated a cost(s) to their research experience. The highest mentioned perceived cost was opportunity cost, where participants commented on losing other valued alternatives when engaging in research. Participants commented on the time, effort, or amount of work needed to engage in research, and a few participants commented on the emotional cost associated with their research experience in terms of the fear of failure. Conclusion As perceived cost is the least studied in the expectancy-value framework, this study contributes to cost values within college students, particularly about early year undergraduate researchers. The findings of this study can form the basis for future work on exploring ways to increase the values and decrease the costs students experience in their undergraduate research experiences.


Author(s):  
Holly E. Bates ◽  
Shanna Lowes ◽  
Sarah L. West

Undergraduate research experiences are important for the development of scientific identity, appreciation of authentic research, and to improve persistence towards science careers. We identified a gap in experiential research opportunities for undergraduate Biology students who were seeking a formal yet small-scale research experience that was unique to their own interests and career aspirations. These opportunities may be especially worthwhile for STEM students aspiring to non-research scientific careers (i.e., medicine, dentistry, forensics, communication) and underrepresented STEM students. Here, we reflect on the use of small-scale, individualized undergraduate research experiences that are based on established methods (MURE). These experiences have helped to fill this gap and create problem-centred learning opportunities for undergraduate students that are as unique as the students themselves.


Author(s):  
Olga Pierrakos

Undergraduate research experiences, which are highly promoted and supported by NSF and other agencies, present a great opportunity for our students to learn essential problem solving skills. The National Science Foundation’s Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program is one of the largest initiatives supporting active research participation by undergraduate students in all of the areas of research funded by NSF. The REU program, with more than 600 sites around the world, presently funds over 1000 active awards, totaling over $327 million. From these active REU awards, 384 (38% of the total active awards) are related to engineering (determined by having ‘engineering’ as a keyword in the title and abstract) and account for about $170 million, about half of the total amount of awards to date. In spite of such widespread support and belief in the value of undergraduate research, limited well-grounded research and evaluation studies exist [1]. Most of the existing literature reveals the predominance of program descriptions, explanation of models, and evaluation efforts, rather than studies grounded on research. Only recently have research and evaluation studies focused on assessing the benefits of undergraduate research [1–8]. Some of these benefits are (a) retention for underrepresented groups, (b) increased interest in the discipline, (c) gaining critical thinking skills, (d) increased self-confidence, and (e) clarification of career goals. Moreover, most of these studies on undergraduate research have focused on the sciences, whereas undergraduate research experiences in engineering have been understudied.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-118
Author(s):  
Kara Zografos ◽  
Emanuel Alcala ◽  
John Capitman ◽  
Leepao Khang

Undergraduate research is defined as an inquiry or investigation conducted by an undergraduate student in collaboration with a faculty member that makes an intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline. This study assessed the impact of integrating undergraduate research experiences into public health curricula on students’ knowledge of neighborhood inequalities, perception of research, and motivation to talk about health issues. The sample consisted of 132 undergraduate students from two groups (intervention and comparison). The intervention group ( n = 71) conducted a structured social observation in various zip codes to characterize assets and liabilities of the local built environment. Self-reported questionnaires assessing the key study variables were administered to the students at baseline and at postintervention. Compared with those in the comparison group, improvements were noted in knowledge among those in the intervention group from pretest to posttest. Participants in the intervention group were also more motivated to talk about health issues compared with those in the comparison group. Perception of research among those in the intervention group also improved over time when participants were divided into two research confidence level groups (confident and nonconfident). The evaluation of this intervention demonstrates the positive impact integrating undergraduate research experiences can have on a sample of students.


2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Knapp ◽  
Nicholas J. Rowland ◽  
Eric P. Charles

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify an important area for librarians to positively impact student retention. Design/methodology/approach – This programmatic and conceptual piece describes how embedding librarians into the growing enterprise of undergraduate research experiences (UREs) lays a framework for a context in which libraries and librarians directly contribute to the retention of undergraduate students. Findings – Librarians are capable of directly contributing to the retention of students. While their efforts, it is contended, contribute routinely and to the actual retention of students, it is difficult for their efforts to register in the assessment of retention used by administrators. This discrepancy can be solved if librarians play a more explicit (and quantifiable) role in retaining students. Research limitations/implications – UREs are a growing, but generally untapped trend for librarians; however, because UREs generally correlate with academic success and student retention, they offer librarians a useful entry point to contribute to the academic mission of colleges and universities, and in a measurable way. Practical implications – Embedded librarianship poses a number of hurdles for its practitioners; however, it also has the potential for libraries and librarians to become more explicitly connected to overall institutional goals and strengthen their positions in the academy more broadly. Social implications – Improving the scientific literacy of undergraduate students and aiding them on their path toward graduation is meaningfully enhanced through the embedding of librarians into the college curriculum. Originality/value – Systematically embedding librarians into UREs is not strongly represented in the literature.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. ar35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle X. Morales ◽  
Sara E. Grineski ◽  
Timothy W. Collins

In 2014, the National Institutes of Health invested $31 million in 10 primary institutions across the United States through the Building Undergraduate Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) program; one requirement of BUILD is sending undergraduate trainees from those primary institutions to partner institutions for research experiences. Mechanisms like BUILD are designed to broaden research opportunities for students, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds. However, to our knowledge, no studies have examined faculty willingness to mentor undergraduates from other institutions through structured training programs. Survey data from 536 faculty members at 13 institutions were collected in Fall 2013 and analyzed using multiple statistical techniques. Results show that faculty who valued the opportunity to increase diversity in the academy and those who believed that mentoring undergraduates benefited their own research expressed greater willingness to serve as research mentors to visiting undergraduates, and faculty who perceived that they did not have the ability to accommodate additional students expressed less willingness to do so. Most respondents viewed student and faculty incentives as motivating factors in their willingness to mentor, but their perspectives on different types of incentives varied based on faculty career stage, discipline, and research funding status. Results have important implications for designing multi-institutional undergraduate research training programs.


2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 724-737 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas D. Wolkow ◽  
Lisa T. Durrenberger ◽  
Michael A. Maynard ◽  
Kylie K. Harrall ◽  
Lisa M. Hines

Early research experiences must be made available to all undergraduate students, including those at 2-yr institutions who account for nearly half of America's college students. We report on barriers unique to 2-yr institutions that preclude the success of an early course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE). Using a randomized study design, we evaluated a CURE in equivalent introductory biology courses at a 4-yr institution and a 2-yr institution within the same geographic region. We found that these student populations developed dramatically different impressions of the experience. Students at the 4-yr institution enjoyed the CURE significantly more than the traditional labs. However, students at the 2-yr institution enjoyed the traditional labs significantly more, even though the CURE successfully produced targeted learning gains. On the basis of course evaluations, we enhanced instructor, student, and support staff training and reevaluated this CURE at a different campus of the same 2-yr institution. This time, the students reported that they enjoyed the research experience significantly more than the traditional labs. We conclude that early research experiences can succeed at 2-yr institutions, provided that a comprehensive implementation strategy targeting instructor, student, and support staff training is in place.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 652-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Ellen Dmochowski ◽  
Dan Garofalo ◽  
Sarah Fisher ◽  
Ann Greene ◽  
Danielle Gambogi

Purpose Colleges and universities increasingly have the mandate and motivation to integrate sustainability into their curricula. The purpose of this paper is to share the strategy used at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn) and provide an evaluation of its success and guidance to others creating similar programs. Design/methodology/approach This article summarizes Penn’s Integrating Sustainability Across the Curriculum (ISAC) program. ISAC pairs Penn undergraduate research assistants with instructors in a collaborative effort to incorporate sustainability into courses. Findings In concert with other Penn initiatives (a course inventory, faculty discussion groups and a research network), ISAC increases Penn’s sustainability-related courses and creates dialogue regarding how various disciplines contribute to sustainability. Practical implications The program described in this article is replicable at other institutions. The authors demonstrate that the logistics of recruiting students and establishing the program are straightforward. Undergraduate students are on campus; their pay requirements are modest; and they are desirous of such research experiences. Social implications The ISAC program inculcates a cultural and behavioral shift as students and faculty approach sustainability issues collaboratively, and it facilitates the development of a shared language of environmental sustainability. Such social implications are difficult to quantify, but are nonetheless valuable outcomes. Originality/value The faculty–student partnership used to facilitate the integration of sustainability into courses at Penn is original. The ISAC program provides a framework for engaging students and faculty in curriculum development around sustainability in a manner that benefits the student research assistants, the participating faculty and future students.


Author(s):  
Sarah L Sangster ◽  
Kara L. Loy ◽  
Sheryl D. Mills ◽  
Karen L. Lawson

In 2014, the Undergraduate Research Initiative at the University of Saskatchewan implemented a pilot project to organize, support, and promote curriculum-based research experience as an integral aspect of participating first-year courses. The framework for the course-based initiative was the research arc; usually in groups, students in these classes would develop a research question, investigate it using discipline-appropriate methodologies, and disseminate the results. Nine classes (Agriculture, Animal Bioscience, Environmental Science, Women’s and Gender Studies, Psychology, Kinesiology, and Interdisciplinary Studies) participated in this program pilot. There were four key agents in the program: faculty instructors, research coaches, students in participating first-year classes, and university administrative staff. This preliminary evaluation of the pilot suggests that first-year undergraduate research experiences have potential to benefit the undergraduate student participants as well as the faculty and research coaches involved. The primary benefits that faculty reported experiencing included an increased interest in ways to engage learners, reexamination of and reflection on their teaching strategies, the pragmatic support of a research coach helping with their work load, and an invigoration of their research. The primary benefits to research coaches included enhancement of their professional skills, experience in lesson planning and facilitation, CV building, and an ideology shift in how to best facilitate learning for undergraduate students. The most prominent benefits for undergraduate students appeared to be that they gained a better idea about how researchers think and work, that they increased their understanding of how research works, and that their own research and professional skills had improved. Early, bottom-up evaluation identified characteristics of implementation that appear to best facilitate achievement of the initiative’s outcomes and identified the potential pitfall of imposing outcomes, from related but distinct initiatives, that may not be achievable or optimal in in the setting of first-year classes. The results of this evaluation suggest that rather than gaining clarity or focus, first-year students in course-based research experiences might gain awareness of their personal potential, of the potential of research, and of their career/educational options. En 2014, l’Université de la Saskatchewan a mis en oeuvre un projet pilote, la Undergraduate Research Initiative (Initiative de recherche pour étudiants de premier cycle) dont l’objectif était d’organiser, de soutenir et de promouvoir l’expérience de recherche basée sur le programme de cours et faisant directement partie des cours de première année participants. Le cadre de cette initiative basée sur les cours était l’arc de recherche; habituellement divisés en groupes, les étudiants inscrits dans ces cours ont élaboré une question de recherche, l’ont examinée par le biais de méthodologies appropriées à la discipline et en ont diffusé les résultats. Neuf cours (agriculture, sciences biologiques animales, sciences de l’environnement, études sur les femmes et le genre, psychologie, kinésiologie et études interdisciplinaires) ont participé à ce programme pilote. Il y avait quatre agents clés dans le programme : les professeurs, les accompagnateurs de recherche, les étudiants inscrits dans les cours de première année participants et le personnel administratif de l’université. Cette évaluation préliminaire du projet pilote suggère que les expériences de recherche en première année d’un programme de premier cycle peuvent potentiellement offrir des avantages aux étudiants de premier cycle qui y participent ainsi qu’aux professeurs et aux accompagnateurs de recherche. Les avantages principaux, selon les professeurs qui ont fait un rapport sur leur expérience, comprennent un plus grand intérêt dans les manières d’engager les apprenants, le réexamen d’une réflexion sur leurs stratégies d’enseignement, le soutien pragmatique des accompagnateurs de recherche qui les aident avec leur charge de travail et une revitalisation de leur recherche. Les avantages principaux pour les accompagnateurs de recherche comprennent une amélioration de leurs compétences professionnelles, une expérience dans la planification et la facilitation des leçons, des expériences à ajouter à leur curriculum vitae et un changement idéologique concernant la meilleure manière de faciliter l’apprentissage des étudiants de premier cycle. Les avantages les plus importants pour les étudiants de premier cycle semblent être qu’ils ont acquis une meilleure compréhension de la manière dont les chercheurs pensent et travaillent et de la manière dont la recherche fonctionne, et que leurs propres recherches et leurs propres compétences professionnelles ont été améliorées. L’évaluation préliminaire participative a identifié des caractéristiques de mise en oeuvre qui semblent faciliter au mieux l’atteinte des résultats de l’initiative et a identifié l’écueil potentiel d’imposer des résultats, à partir d’initiatives différentes mais connexes, qui risquent de ne pas être réalisables ou optimales dans le cadre de cours de première année. Les résultats de cette évaluation suggèrent que, plutôt que de gagner en clarté ou en focus, les étudiants de première année qui participent à des expériences de recherche basées sur les cours pourraient prendre conscience de leur potentiel personnel, du potentiel de la recherche et de leurs options de carrière ou scolaires.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document