scholarly journals Engaging First-year University Students in Research: Promise, Potentials, and Pitfalls

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L Sangster ◽  
Kara L. Loy ◽  
Sheryl D. Mills ◽  
Karen L. Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Interdisciplinary Studies ◽  
First Year ◽  
Preliminary Evaluation ◽  
Professional Skills ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Research Initiative ◽  
Premier Cycle

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.

scholarly journals Early Engagement in Course-Based Research Increases Graduation Rates and Completion of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Degrees

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. ar20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacia E. Rodenbusch ◽  
Paul R. Hernandez ◽  
Sarah L. Simmons ◽  
Erin L. Dolan
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Biology Education ◽  
First Year ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Grade Point ◽  
Stem Major ◽  
Research Initiative ◽  
And Mathematics

National efforts to transform undergraduate biology education call for research experiences to be an integral component of learning for all students. Course-based undergraduate research experiences, or CUREs, have been championed for engaging students in research at a scale that is not possible through apprenticeships in faculty research laboratories. Yet there are few if any studies that examine the long-term effects of participating in CUREs on desired student outcomes, such as graduating from college and completing a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) major. One CURE program, the Freshman Research Initiative (FRI), has engaged thousands of first-year undergraduates over the past decade. Using propensity score–matching to control for student-level differences, we tested the effect of participating in FRI on students’ probability of graduating with a STEM degree, probability of graduating within 6 yr, and grade point average (GPA) at graduation. Students who completed all three semesters of FRI were significantly more likely than their non-FRI peers to earn a STEM degree and graduate within 6 yr. FRI had no significant effect on students’ GPAs at graduation. The effects were similar for diverse students. These results provide the most robust and best-controlled evidence to date to support calls for early involvement of undergraduates in research.

scholarly journals A Framework for Implementing Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) in Freshman Biology Labs

2016 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 448-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arundhati Bakshi ◽  
Lorelei E. Patrick ◽  
E. William Wischusen
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Research University ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Implementation Barriers ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Undergraduate Research Experiences ◽  
Widespread Implementation ◽  
Flexible Framework ◽  
Large Research

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.

scholarly journals Early year undergraduate researchers’ reflections on the values and perceived costs of their research experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaye D. Ceyhan ◽  
John W. Tillotson
Keyword(s):  
Achievement Motivation ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Intrinsic Value ◽  
Value Theory ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Expectancy Value ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Future Work

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.

A Comparison of Two Different Strategies for Undergraduate Research Within the Framework of a Rotor Dynamics Laboratory

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Meagher ◽  
Xi Wu
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Rotor Dynamics ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Conducting Research ◽  
Directed Research

Introductory graduate level courses and upper division technical electives often present a student with his or her first research project. Time limitations of a course require a balance between open ended discovery, development of specialized technical knowledge, and teaching the mechanics of research methodology. The case study presented in this paper is an outline of two different strategies to introduce research to undergraduate students within the framework of a rotor dynamics laboratory. The laboratory had historically been designed to demonstrate machinery malfunctions in a series of short exercises. The laboratory was changed to have several introductory labs designed to prepare students for an extended self-directed research project that included literature searches, paper reviews, design of experiments, and presentation of research findings to the class. In one strategy the students were expected to practice discovery primarily through experimentation with specific, restricted goals. In the other strategy the students were given more flexibility defining the research question and in establishing priorities. Both projects had students design an experiment whose results were compared to mathematical simulations and each led to research that was presented at a conference. Although both were considered successful in terms of student learning and research outcomes, a balance biased toward experimentation and restricted student options for discovery actually led to broader research findings and more in-depth student research but with less student appreciation for and practice with the necessary preliminary stages of conducting research. The student learning experiences and methodologies for each scenario are presented and compared in this paper.

Role of Research Educator in sequential course-based undergraduate research experience program

2019 ◽  
Vol 366 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Light ◽  
Megan Fegley ◽  
Nancy Stamp
Keyword(s):  
Research Training ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Work Load ◽  
Assistant Professor ◽  
First Year ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Microbial Biofilms ◽  
Research Track ◽  
Teaching Responsibilities

ABSTRACT In our First-Year Research Immersion (FRI) program, students take a sequence of three CUREs (course-based undergraduate research experiences). Each Research Educator (Research Assistant Professor, aka RE) oversees the day-to-day work of about 30 first-year and 25 second-year students in a dedicated research-training lab. Instead of the typical work-load division for faculty between their teaching responsibilities (typically lecture) and research programs, REs combine these two responsibilities into one endeavour that better engages and teaches beginning students intending to major in science or engineering. Although more challenging for REs, their work in FRI expands their professional development substantially. Examples from the microbiology research track (specifically, Microbial Biofilms in Human Health) illustrate both the challenges and rewards for the REs.

scholarly journals MUREs - a new member of the URE-CURE family of research opportunities for undergrads

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly E. Bates ◽  
Shanna Lowes ◽  
Sarah L. West
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Research Opportunities ◽  
Biology Students ◽  
Undergraduate Research Experiences ◽  
Stem Students ◽  
Experiential Research

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.

scholarly journals Validate the Use of College Self Efficacy Inventory for Measuring Psychosocial Factors on Indian Students

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Rachna Jain ◽  
Ms. Bharti Chaudhary
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Research Question ◽  
College Experience ◽  
First Year ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Social Self ◽  
The Social ◽  
Watson Test ◽  
Indian Students

The purpose of this study was to apply the College Self-Efficacy Inventory (CSEI) scale to measure the social and psychological factors on Indian students. The major research question of the study is to answer whether the CSEI scale fit the data. The sample of the study is 141 in BBA and B.Com (H) first year in affiliated college of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Delhi. Path analysis has been used in the study to examine the interrelationship between course-roommate-social self-efficacy. To analyse the data correlation, CFI, RMSEA, Cron bach alpha, regression weights, Durbin – Watson test etc. has been used. The study found affirmative steps in collecting validity evidence for the CSEI scale as well as found significant inter – relationship between course-roommate-social self-efficacy of Indian undergraduate students. It has been also found that CSEI scale can be used to measure college self- efficacy for the broader college experience of Indian students.

A Study of Mechanical Engineering Students’ Learning Outcomes During Summer Undergraduate Research Experiences

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Pierrakos
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Research Participation ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Great Opportunity ◽  
Problem Solving Skills ◽  
Undergraduate Research Experiences

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.

scholarly journals Emphasizing iterative practices for a sequential course-based undergraduate research experience in microbial biofilms

2019 ◽  
Vol 366 (23) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin J Light ◽  
Megan Fegley ◽  
Nancy Stamp
Keyword(s):  
Course Design ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
First Year ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Design Data ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Microbial Biofilms ◽  
Research Track ◽  
Student Cohorts

ABSTRACT Iteration is a fundamental area of course design in course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). Iteration includes development of many skills necessary for laboratory work, experimental design, data analysis, communication and teamwork. With a focus on the microbial biofilm research track of the First-year Research Immersion (FRI) program, the perceptions of four student cohorts were examined at the end of the three-term CURE sequence, relative to exposure to iterative tasks, learning gains and benefits from the research experience. Based on results from the first two cohorts, substantial changes were made in the CURE sequence to increase iterative tasks and discussion with students about the iterative nature of research. In turn, the results for the latter cohorts reached FRI program targets. In sum, novice researchers benefit from a deliberate step-wise approach for developing skills to meet the requirements and understand the complex role of iteration in real research.

Integrating Research Experiences Into Public Health Curricula: Effects on Undergraduate Students’ Knowledge of Neighborhood Inequalities, Perception of Research, and Motivation to Talk About Health Issues

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-118
Author(s):  
Kara Zografos ◽  
Emanuel Alcala ◽  
John Capitman ◽  
Leepao Khang
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Undergraduate Research ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Undergraduate Research Experiences ◽  
The Impact

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document