scholarly journals Assessment of Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences: A Meeting Report

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Corwin Auchincloss ◽  
Sandra L. Laursen ◽  
Janet L. Branchaw ◽  
Kevin Eagan ◽  
Mark Graham ◽  
...  

The Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Network (CUREnet) was initiated in 2012 with funding from the National Science Foundation program for Research Coordination Networks in Undergraduate Biology Education. CUREnet aims to address topics, problems, and opportunities inherent to integrating research experiences into undergraduate courses. During CUREnet meetings and discussions, it became apparent that there is need for a clear definition of what constitutes a CURE and systematic exploration of what makes CUREs meaningful in terms of student learning. Thus, we assembled a small working group of people with expertise in CURE instruction and assessment to: 1) draft an operational definition of a CURE, with the aim of defining what makes a laboratory course or project a “research experience”; 2) summarize research on CUREs, as well as findings from studies of undergraduate research internships that would be useful for thinking about how students are influenced by participating in CUREs; and 3) identify areas of greatest need with respect to CURE assessment, and directions for future research on and evaluation of CUREs. This report summarizes the outcomes and recommendations of this meeting.

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. mr2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura A. Diaz-Martinez ◽  
Ginger R. Fisher ◽  
David Esparza ◽  
Jay M. Bhatt ◽  
Christina E. D’Arcy ◽  
...  

Advancement of the scientific enterprise relies on individuals conducting research in an ethical and responsible manner. Educating emergent scholars in the principles of ethics/responsible conduct of research (E/RCR) is therefore critical to ensuring such advancement. The recent impetus to include authentic research opportunities as part of the undergraduate curriculum, via course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), has been shown to increase cognitive and noncognitive student outcomes. Because of these important benefits, CUREs are becoming more common and often constitute the first research experience for many students. However, despite the importance of E/RCR in the research process, we know of few efforts to incorporate E/RCR education into CUREs. The Ethics Network for Course-based Opportunities in Undergraduate Research (ENCOUR) was created to address this concern and promote the integration of E/RCR within CUREs in the biological sciences and related disciplines. During the inaugural ENCOUR meeting, a four-pronged approach was used to develop guidelines for the effective integration of E/RCR in CUREs. This approach included: 1) defining appropriate student learning objectives; 2) identifying relevant curriculum; 3) identifying relevant assessments; and 4) defining key aspects of professional development for CURE facilitators. Meeting outcomes, including the aforementioned E/RCR guidelines, are described herein.


10.28945/4815 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 143-165
Author(s):  
U. Yeliz Eseryel ◽  
John R. Drake ◽  
Deniz Eseryel

Aim/Purpose: This article aimed to design and evaluate a pedagogical technique for altering students’ classroom digital multitasking behaviors. The technique we designed and evaluated is called course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE). With this technique, the students wrote a research article based on a multitasking experiment that the instructor conducted with the students. The students conducted a literature review, developed their own research questions, they analyzed experiment data, and presented results. This study evaluated the how the CURE contributed to student multitasking behavior change. Background: Multitasking is defined as doing more than one thing at a time. Multitasking is really the engagement in individual and discrete tasks that are performed in succession. Research showed that students multitasked very often during courses. Researchers indicated that this was a problem especially for online teaching, because when students went online, they tended to multitask. Extant research indicated that digital multitasking in class harmed student performance. Multiple studies suggested that students who multitasked spent more time finishing their tasks and made more mistakes. Regardless of students’ gender or GPA, students who multitasked in class performed worse and got a lower grade than those who did not. However, little is known about how to change students’ digital multitasking behaviors. In this study, we used the transtheoretical model of behavior change to investigate how our pedagogical technique (CURE) changed students’ digital multitasking behaviors. Methodology: Using a course-based undergraduate research experience design, a new classroom intervention was designed and evaluated through a content analysis of pre- and post-intervention student reflections. As part of the course-based undergraduate research experience design, the students conducted a literature review, developed their own research questions, they analyzed experiment data, and presented results. This study evaluated the how teaching using a course-based undergraduate research experience contributed to student multitasking behavior change. Transtheoretical model of behavior change was used to investigate how our pedagogical technique changed students’ digital multitasking behaviors. Contribution: The paper described how teaching using a course-based undergraduate research experience can be used in practice. Further, it demonstrated the utility of this technique in changing student digital multitasking behaviors. This study contributed to constructivist approaches in education. Other unwanted student attitudes and behaviors can be changed using this approach to learning. Findings: As a result of CURE teaching, a majority of students observed the negative aspects of multitasking and intended to change their digital multitasking behaviors. Sixty-one percent of the participants experienced attitude changes, namely increased negative attitude towards multitasking in class. This is important because research found that while both students and instructors believed off-task technology use hinders learning, their views differed significantly, with more instructors than students feeling strongly that students’ use of technology in class is a problem. Moreover, our study showed that with teaching using CURE, it is possible to move the students on the ladder of change as quickly as within one semester (13 weeks). Seventy-one percent of the students reported moving to a higher stage of change post-intervention. Recommendations for Practitioners: Faculty wishing to curb student digital multitasking behaviors may conduct in-class experimentation with multitasking and have their students write a research report on their findings. Course-based undergraduate research experiences may make the effects of digital multitasking more apparent to the students. The students may become more aware of their own multitasking behaviors rather than doing them habitually. This technique is also recommended for those instructors who would like to introduce academic careers as a potential career option to their students. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers should explore changing other unwanted undergraduate student behaviors with course-based undergraduate experiences. Researchers may use the transtheoretical model of change to evaluate the effectiveness of techniques used to change behaviors. Impact on Society: The negative outcomes of digital multitasking are not confined to the classroom. Digital multitasking impacts productivity in many domains. If techniques such as those used in this article become more common, changes in multitasking intentions could show broad improvements in productivity across many fields. Future Research: This paper constitutes a pilot study due to the small convenience sample that is used for the study. Future research should replicate this study with larger and randomized samples. Further investigation of the CURE technique can improve its effectiveness or reduce the instructor input while attaining the same behavioral changes.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. ar79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Rowland ◽  
Rhianna Pedwell ◽  
Gwen Lawrie ◽  
Joseph Lovie-Toon ◽  
Yu Hung

The recent push for more authentic teaching and learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics indicates a shared agreement that undergraduates require greater exposure to professional practices. There is considerable variation, however, in how “authentic” science education is defined. In this paper we present our definition of authenticity as it applies to an “authentic” large-scale undergraduate research experience (ALURE); we also look to the literature and the student voice for alternate perceptions around this concept. A metareview of science education literature confirmed the inconsistency in definitions and application of the notion of authentic science education. An exploration of how authenticity was explained in 604 reflections from ALURE and traditional laboratory students revealed contrasting and surprising notions and experiences of authenticity. We consider the student experience in terms of alignment with 1) the intent of our designed curriculum and 2) the literature definitions of authentic science education. These findings contribute to the conversation surrounding authenticity in science education. They suggest two things: 1) educational experiences can have significant authenticity for the participants, even when there is no purposeful design for authentic practice, and 2) the continuing discussion of and design for authenticity in UREs may be redundant.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. ar10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Kirkpatrick ◽  
Anita Schuchardt ◽  
Daniel Baltz ◽  
Sehoya Cotner

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have the potential to improve undergraduate biology education by involving large numbers of students in research. CUREs can take a variety of forms with different affordances and constraints, complicating the evaluation of design features that might contribute to successful outcomes. In this study, we compared students’ responses to three different research experiences offered within the same course. One of the research experiences involved purely computational work, whereas the other two offerings were bench-based research experiences. We found that students who participated in computer-based research reported at least as much interest in their research projects, a higher sense of achievement, and a higher level of satisfaction with the course compared with students who did bench-based research projects. In open-ended comments, similar proportions of students in each research area expressed some sense of project ownership as contributing positively to their course experiences. Their comments also supported the finding that experiencing a sense of achievement was a predictor of course satisfaction. We conclude that both computer-based and bench-based CUREs can have positive impacts on students’ attitudes. Development of more computer-based CUREs might allow larger numbers of students to benefit from participating in a research experience.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Abbey L. Dvorak ◽  
Eugenia Hernandez-Ruiz ◽  
Halle Nick ◽  
Ruowen Qi ◽  
Celeste Alderete ◽  
...  

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CURE) allow students opportunities to develop research skills. In a scaffolded CURE, music therapy and music education students composed, evaluated, and selected the music stimuli used in a music and mindfulness study with non-musicians at Site 1 and musicians at Site 2. The purposes of this paper are to (a) describe the process of student music stimuli composition and evaluation for use in a course-based undergraduate research experience and (b) identify benefits, challenges, and lessons learned from the viewpoints of students, graduate assistants, and faculty who participated in the multi-site study. Eight students, two graduate assistants, and two faculty provide an overview of the CURE teaching model and assignments, and share first-person accounts of their experiences participating in this CURE.  


2015 ◽  
Vol 77 (7) ◽  
pp. 526-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Mennella

The importance of a robust undergraduate research experience has been demonstrated time and again. However, too few undergraduates engage in genuine research and leverage this opportunity. Here, I present a laboratory course in cell and molecular biology that is designed to mimic a true research project. Students work through a 10-step experimental design culminating in the construction, expression, and visualization of microtubules fused to green fluorescent protein in baker's yeast. The steps of this project include the isolation of the tubulin gene from yeast genomic DNA, the cloning of that gene into an expression vector, the amplification of this plasmid in E. coli, and the expression of fluorescent tubulin in yeast. Controls and validation steps are embedded throughout the project, as they would be in a genuine research project. This laboratory course more closely resembles a one-semester undergraduate research experience than a typical lab course. However, because this course reaches a much larger number of students compared with undergraduate research opportunities, it provides students with a valuable research experience that remains confined to the scheduled time block of a typical lab course. In this way, many of the benefits of research are experienced by a large number of undergraduates.


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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. ar46
Author(s):  
Ashley N. Turner ◽  
Anil K. Challa ◽  
Katelyn M. Cooper

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) engage students with research experiences in a course format and can sometimes result in publication of that research. This interview study identifies student-perceived benefits of authoring a publication stemming from a CURE and explores student perceptions of authorship.


2019 ◽  
Vol 97 (11) ◽  
pp. 4691-4697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra K Jones ◽  
Annie B Lerner

Abstract Undergraduate research involves experiential learning methods that helps animal science students gain critical thinking skills. There is high demand for these opportunities. For example, 77.9% of incoming freshmen in the Department of Animal Sciences & Industry at Kansas State University in Fall 2017 and Fall 2018 planned to conduct research sometime during their undergraduate career (422 of 542 students). Conventional, one-on-one mentoring methods in the department were only serving 1.7% of the undergraduate population (21 of 1,212 students). This creates a unique challenge of increasing the number of undergraduate research opportunities, while maintaining the impact of individualized experiential learning. One method to address this challenge is the incorporation of a course-based research program. In this model, research projects are conducted during a conventional semester during scheduled classroom hours, with project components divided into 3 sections: (1) research preparation, including compliance requirements, hypothesis testing, experimental design, and protocol development; (2) data collection; and (3) data interpretation and dissemination. Students collect data as a team, but individually develop their own research abstract and poster to maintain a high level of experiential learning. By teaching multiple sections of this course per semester and incorporating the concepts into existing laboratories, 13.5% of students in the department completed undergraduate research in the 2018–2019 academic year (162 of 1,197 students). To monitor the quality of these experiences, student critical thinking ability was assessed using the online Critical Thinking Basic Concepts & Understanding Test (Foundation for Critical Thinking, Tomales, CA). Undergraduate research experiences increased (P = 0.028) the growth in student critical thinking score, but the type of research experience did not influence assessed skills (P > 0.281). Thus, course-based undergraduate research experiences may be an option for growing the quantity and quality of undergraduate research experience in animal science.


2019 ◽  
Vol 97 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 237-238
Author(s):  
Cassandra K Jones

Abstract Critical thinking is a key student learning outcome of undergraduate education in animal science. Undergraduate research is frequently encouraged as a way of growing critical thinking skills, but evidence of its influence is mostly anecdotal. Furthermore, diminishing resources may limit the number and quality of available experiences. The objective of this research was to evaluate how undergraduate research experiences impact critical thinking in animal science students. A total of 556 undergraduate students in the Department of Animal Sciences & Industry at Kansas State University took the online Critical Thinking Basic Concepts & Understanding Test (Foundation for Critical Thinking, Tomales, CA) in Fall 2017 (baseline) and again in Fall 2018 (end line). This online assessment is a 100-question test (1 point/question). Of these, 507 students consented to their scores being used for research purposes, and were classified into one of three categories: 1) never conducted undergraduate research (n = 435); 2) conducted a course-based undergraduate research experience during the time period (n = 60); or 3) conducted a traditional participant-based undergraduate research experience during the time period (n = 12). Baseline, end line, and growth in critical thinking (difference between baseline and end line) scores were analyzed using the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS (v.9.4, Cary, NC) as a nested design. There were no detected differences in baseline critical thinking scores among students (P = 0.195). Students conducting undergraduate research tended to have higher end line (P = 0.088) and had greater growth (P = 0.047) in critical thinking score than those not conducting undergraduate research. The type of undergraduate research experience did not influence any measured criteria (P > 0.200). In summary, this research confirms that undergraduate research experiences increase animal science student critical thinking ability. Course-based undergraduate research experiences can be efficient ways to increase the quantity of students exposed to research without compromising critical thinking growth compared to conventional participant-based models.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document