Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences or CUREs promote student-centered learning through infusion of research principles within an undergraduate course. This is an ideal pedagogy for use in General Chemistry. CUREs provide access to research experience to a broader audience, which increases engagement and success. A CURE model was implemented in a second semester General Chemistry course at Pasadena City College, a Hispanic serving institution (HSI) community college. Student success rate in the CURE chemistry classroom increased by over 20% and students’ completion rates increased over 5%. In addition, success, and completion rates of Hispanic students in the class showed no achievement gap and an over 10% higher completion rate compared to students that took the non-CURE chemistry course. CUREs also had the added benefit of providing more populous groups of undergraduates with opportunities to get a taste of real-world working scenarios that would normally be reserved for upper-level graduate students. Adopting CUREs as an integral part of an institutions’ learning strategies promotes student engagement that will bridge the gaps in traditional learning, but also facilitate development of the essential soft skills required in the collaborative environment that is commonplace in working professional settings. The potential role and relationship of CUREs implementation regarding the revival and cultivation of polymathy among future students as well as its implications on the future of academic instruction based on connections made from historical and interdisciplinary observations are also explores.
more »
« less
A report on learning gains and student confidence after incorporating an enzyme purification and characterization course‐based undergraduate experience
Course‐based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) can provide undergraduate students access to research opportunities when student and faculty resources are limited. In addition to expanding research opportunities, CUREs may also be explored as a pedagogical tool for improving student learning of course content and laboratory skills, as well as improving meta‐cognitive features such as confidence. We examined how a 6‐week CURE in an upper‐level undergraduate biochemistry lab affected student gains in content knowledge and confidence in scientific abilities, compared to a non‐CURE section of the same course. We find that gains in content knowledge were similar between CURE and non‐CURE sections, indicating the CURE does not negatively impact student learning. The CURE was associated with a statistically significant gain in student confidence, compared to non‐CURE group. These results show that even a relatively short CURE can be effective in improving student confidence at scientific research skills, in addition to expanding access to research.
more » « less- Award ID(s):
- 1708828
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10403451
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
- Volume:
- 51
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1470-8175
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 128-136
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) are an increasingly utilized model for exposing students to research. The lack of robust assessments is a major hurdle to wider adoption of CUREs. The Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a drastic shift of in-person courses to the online format. Using the Participant Perception Indicator (PPI) survey, we measured students’ self-reported changes in learning from such a biochemistry course at a large university in south Florida based on the Biochemistry Authentic Scientific Inquiry Lab (BASIL) model. By doing this, we were able to better understand the student-benefits of CUREs and how these benefits are affected by changes in learning modalities between two relevant semesters, i.e., winter and summer of 2020. Anticipated learning outcomes (ALOs) help partially fill the gap left by the loss of physical interaction in experimental procedures. Our analysis indicated that students learned more through bioinformatic experiments compared to their wet-lab counterparts. Using pre- and post- surveys, students reported that their experience and confidence gains lagged behind their knowledge gain of technique-based skills. Students are not as confident in their understanding of techniques when unable to perform those in the physical laboratory. Thus, despite extensive pursuit of the purpose and protocols of the experiments and techniques, neither their experience nor their confidence was on par with their knowledge. This study is one of the first examples demonstrating a quantitative student-learning assessment of a CURE in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The novel assessment strategies targeted to identify gaps in learning mastery could facilitate the adoption of CUREs, fostering opportunities for all undergraduate students to vital laboratory research experiences in STEM.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Here we evaluate undergraduate student attitudes about science after each of three authentic research experiences in a semester of an introductory biology laboratory course at Utah State University. The three course-based research experiences (CUREs) vary in length and student freedom, and they cover different areas of biology. Students responded to the science attitude items of the CURE Survey. When compared to national data, our students faired similarly, and all students struggled with certain epistemic assumptions about science knowledge. As also seen in the national database, change in science attitude was slight and nonlinear. Student self confidence in what a career scientist is and in scientific process skills was the best predictor of scientific maturity, not the three CUREs or other aspects of students’ background. We discuss the slight positive and negative change in attitude we did influence, and we note that most students would choose to have another research experience.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Here we present unique perspectives from undergraduate students (n=3) in STEM who have taken both a traditional laboratory iteration and a Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) iteration of the same introductory chemistry course. CUREs can be effective models for integrating research in courses and fostering student learning gains. Via phenomenological interviews, we asked students to describe the differences in their perspectives, feelings, and experiences between a traditional lab guided by a lab manual and a CURE. We found that (i.) critical thinking/problem solving, (ii.) group work/collaboration, (iii.) student-led research questions and activities, and (iv.) time management are the top four emergent themes associated with the CURE course. Students also indicated that they learned more disciplinary content in the CURE, and, importantly, that they prefer it over the traditional lab. These findings add another dimension of success to CUREs in STEM education, particularly surrounding student retention.more » « less
-
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an effective way to integrate research into an undergraduate science curriculum and extend research experiences to a large, diverse group of early-career students. We developed a biology CURE at the University of Miami (UM) called the UM Authentic Research Laboratories (UMARL), in which groups of first-year students investigated novel questions and conducted projects of their own design related to the research themes of the faculty instructors. Herein, we describe the implementation and student outcomes of this long-running CURE. Using a national survey of student learning through research experiences in courses, we found that UMARL led to high student self-reported learning gains in research skills such as data analysis and science communication, as well as personal development skills such as self-confidence and self-efficacy. Our analysis of academic outcomes revealed that the odds of students who took UMARL engaging in individual research, graduating with a degree in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) within 4 years, and graduating with honors were 1.5–1.7 times greater than the odds for a matched group of students from UM’s traditional biology labs. The authenticity of UMARL may have fostered students’ confidence that they can do real research, reinforcing their persistence in STEM.more » « less
