Increasing Participation in Psychological Science by Using Course-Based Research Projects: Testing Theory, Using Open-Science Practices, and Professionally Presenting Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 009862832110242
Author(s):  
Scott D. Frankowski

Introduction: Undergraduate research experiences prepare students for graduate training or employment. Statement of problem: At many teaching-intensive universities, there is a greater demand for research experiences than there are independent study opportunities. Students from typically underrepresented backgrounds may also be unaware of a department’s undergraduate research pipeline of independent study, honor’s theses, and internal research funding. Literature review: Course-based research contributes to diversity and inclusivity in access to undergraduate research experiences, especially at teaching-intensive universities. Course-based research is often integrated into methods courses, but not content courses. Teaching implications: I present practical ways to integrate research projects into courses. I stress the importance of testing theory, teaching open-science practices, and providing opportunities for students to present professionally. I also provide examples of implementing group research projects in content courses. Conclusion: Implementing course-based research projects, especially at teaching-intensive universities, can expand access to psychological science by providing valuable research opportunities for many students. Instructors can also benefit by intertwining their teaching, mentoring, and research goals. Future research should focus on experimentally testing learning outcomes.

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.


Author(s):  
Andrea Bresee ◽  
Joyce Kinkead

Abstract This article focuses on the progress of an undergraduate English major on the scholarship continuum outlined by Laurie Grobman (2009). The student engaged in authentic research in a research methods course for English majors, a class that also meets a university requirement of “quantitative intensive,” and she completed two research projects of note. Her journey has implications and significance for faculty in designing undergraduate research experiences.


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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. es1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa A. Corwin ◽  
Mark J. Graham ◽  
Erin L. Dolan

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are being championed as scalable ways of involving undergraduates in science research. Studies of CUREs have shown that participating students achieve many of the same outcomes as students who complete research internships. However, CUREs vary widely in their design and implementation, and aspects of CUREs that are necessary and sufficient to achieve desired student outcomes have not been elucidated. To guide future research aimed at understanding the causal mechanisms underlying CURE efficacy, we used a systems approach to generate pathway models representing hypotheses of how CURE outcomes are achieved. We started by reviewing studies of CUREs and research internships to generate a comprehensive set of outcomes of research experiences, determining the level of evidence supporting each outcome. We then used this body of research and drew from learning theory to hypothesize connections between what students do during CUREs and the outcomes that have the best empirical support. We offer these models as hypotheses for the CURE community to test, revise, elaborate, or refute. We also cite instruments that are ready to use in CURE assessment and note gaps for which instruments need to be developed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. ar55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Kowalski ◽  
Geoffrey C. Hoops ◽  
R. Jeremy Johnson

Classroom undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) provide students access to the measurable benefits of undergraduate research experiences (UREs). Herein, we describe the implementation and assessment of a novel model for cohesive CUREs focused on central research themes involving faculty research collaboration across departments. Specifically, we implemented three collaborative CUREs spanning chemical biology, biochemistry, and neurobiology that incorporated faculty members’ research interests and revolved around the central theme of visualizing biological processes like Mycobacterium tuberculosis enzyme activity and neural signaling using fluorescent molecules. Each CURE laboratory involved multiple experimental phases and culminated in novel, open-ended, and reiterative student-driven research projects. Course assessments showed CURE participation increased students’ experimental design skills, attitudes and confidence about research, perceived understanding of the scientific process, and interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. More than 75% of CURE students also engaged in independent scientific research projects, and faculty CURE contributors saw substantial increases in research productivity, including increased undergraduate student involvement and academic outputs. Our collaborative CUREs demonstrate the advantages of multicourse CUREs for achieving increased faculty research productivity and traditional CURE-associated student learning and attitude gains. Our collaborative CURE design represents a novel CURE model for ongoing laboratory reform that benefits both faculty and students.


2019 ◽  
Vol 366 (13) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Light ◽  
Megan Fegley ◽  
Nancy Stamp

ABSTRACT Science education studies have shown that a sequence of course-based research experiences has many positive effects for undergraduates. To maximize those benefits, we created a training program for the instructors (aka Research Educators). The program guides them in how to move students early in their college years through the process of science such that students then can successfully apply their learning to conduct real research projects. The key to instructors’ training is creating a supportive community of practice in which everyone participates, including by taking leading roles.


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.


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 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-51
Author(s):  
Matt Honoré ◽  
◽  
Thomas E. Keller ◽  
Jen Lindwall ◽  
Rachel Crist ◽  
...  

The authors developed the CREDIT URE to define and measure roles performed by undergraduates working in research placements. Derived from an open-source taxonomy for determining authorship credit, the CREDIT URE defines 14 possible roles, allowing students and their research mentors to rate the degree to which students participate in each role. The tool was administered longitudinally across three cohorts of undergraduate student-mentor pairs involved in a biomedical research training program.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document