skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Uncovering Factors Influencing Instructors’ Decision Process when Considering Implementation of a Course-Based Research Experience
Title: Uncovering Factors Influencing Instructors’ Decision Process when Considering Implementation of a Course-Based Research Experience
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an effective way to expose large numbers of students to authentic research, yet most laboratory courses still use traditional “cookbook” methods. While barriers to using CUREs have been captured postimplementation, little is known about the decision mindset before implementation or what features of CURE design may mitigate perceived barriers. Perception of an innovation (such as a CURE) influences the likelihood of its adoption, and diffusion of innovations theory posits that the decision to adopt is largely influenced by five perceived features of an innovation: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialability. We conducted interviews with instructors considering using the Prevalence of Antibiotic Resistance in the Environment (PARE) project to assess their perceptions of CUREs and motivations for using PARE. Instructors viewed CUREs as having relative advantages over traditional methods; however, CUREs were also viewed as complex, with instructors citing multiple barriers. Instructors were motivated to use PARE because of its potential scientific impact and compatibility with their courses’ structures and resources. Instructors perceived PARE to have few barriers to implementation compared with other CUREs. Designing CUREs that address common instructor barriers and drivers could increase the rate of diffusion of CUREs.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1912520
PAR ID:
10562784
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Editor(s):
Spell, Rachelle
Publisher / Repository:
American Society for Cell Biology
Date Published:
Journal Name:
CBE—Life Sciences Education
Volume:
19
Issue:
2
ISSN:
1931-7913
Page Range / eLocation ID:
ar13
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, CBE—Life Sciences Education)
    Hewlett, James (Ed.)
    Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are an effective method of engaging large numbers of students in authentic research but are associated with barriers to adoption. Short CURE modules may serve as a low-barrier entryway, but their effectiveness in promoting expansion has not been studied. The Prevalence of Antibiotic Resistance in the Environment (PARE) project is a modular CURE designed to be a low-barrier gateway into CURE use. In a series of interviews, we track and characterize use of PARE in 19 PARE-interested instructors throughout the Innovation-Decision Process described by Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations theory. The majority (16/19) implement PARE at least once, and a majority of these implementers (11/16) expanded use by the final interview. Three of four cases of discontinuance were due to a disruption such as moving institutions or a change in course assignment and occurred for community college faculty. Expanders expressed fewer personal challenges than nonexpanders. Overall analysis shows that perception of barriers is nuanced and impacted by the innovation itself, the institutional context, and one’s own experiences. These results suggest that a short duration, low barrier CURE can serve as a catalyst for implementation of a longer duration CURE. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Integrative and Comparative Biology)
    null (Ed.)
    Synopsis  Early exposure to course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) in introductory biology courses can promote positive student outcomes such as increased confidence, critical thinking, and views of applicability in lower-level courses, but it is unknown if these same impacts are achieved by upper-level courses. Upper-level courses differ from introductory courses in several ways, and one difference that could impact these positive student outcomes is the importance of balancing structure with independence in upper-level CUREs where students typically have more autonomy and greater complexity in their research projects. Here we compare and discuss two formats of upper-level biology CUREs (Guided and Autonomous) that vary along a continuum between structure and independence. We share our experiences teaching an upper-level CURE in two different formats and contrast those formats through student reported perceptions of confidence, professional applicability, and CURE format. Results indicate that the Guided Format (i.e., a more even balance between structure and independence) led to more positive impacts on student outcomes than the Autonomous Format (less structure and increased independence). We review the benefits and drawbacks of each approach while considering the unique elements of upper-level courses relative to lower-level courses. We conclude with a discussion of how implementing structured skill-building can assist instructors in adapting CUREs to their courses. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, CBE—Life Sciences Education)
    Braun, Derek (Ed.)
    Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), which often engage students as early as freshman year, have become increasingly common in biology curricula. While many studies have highlighted the benefits of CUREs, little attention has been paid to responsible and ethical conduct of research (RECR) education in such contexts. Given this observation, we adopted a mixed methods approach to explore the extent to which RECR education is being implemented and assessed in biological sciences CUREs nationwide. Survey and semistructured interview data show a general awareness of the importance of incorporating RECR education into CUREs, with all respondents addressing at least one RECR topic in their courses. However, integration of RECR education within the CURE environment primarily focuses on the application of RECR during research practice, often takes the form of corrective measures, and appears to be rarely assessed. Participants reported lack of time and materials as the main barriers to purposeful inclusion of RECR education within their courses. These results underscore a need for the CURE community to develop resources and effective models to integrate RECR education into biology CUREs. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, PLOS ONE)
    Rumain, Barbara T. (Ed.)
    Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are laboratory courses that integrate broadly relevant problems, discovery, use of the scientific process, collaboration, and iteration to provide more students with research experiences than is possible in individually mentored faculty laboratories. Members of the national Malate dehydrogenase CUREs Community (MCC) investigated the differences in student impacts between traditional laboratory courses (control), a short module CURE within traditional laboratory courses (mCURE), and CUREs lasting the entire course (cCURE). The sample included approximately 1,500 students taught by 22 faculty at 19 institutions. We investigated course structures for elements of a CURE and student outcomes including student knowledge, student learning, student attitudes, interest in future research, overall experience, future GPA, and retention in STEM. We also disaggregated the data to investigate whether underrepresented minority (URM) outcomes were different from White and Asian students. We found that the less time students spent in the CURE the less the course was reported to contain experiences indicative of a CURE. The cCURE imparted the largest impacts for experimental design, career interests, and plans to conduct future research, while the remaining outcomes were similar between the three conditions. The mCURE student outcomes were similar to control courses for most outcomes measured in this study. However, for experimental design, the mCURE was not significantly different than either the control or cCURE. Comparing URM and White/Asian student outcomes indicated no difference for condition, except for interest in future research. Notably, the URM students in the mCURE condition had significantly higher interest in conducting research in the future than White/Asian students. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; (, Journal of Chemical Education)
    Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are a promising approach for incorporating inquiry-based instruction into the under- graduate chemistry laboratory curriculum. This study used data from a national survey of inorganic chemistry faculty members (n = 142) to investigate CURE implementation in the inorganic chemistry instructional laboratory. Results indicate that faculty members who implement CUREs place greater emphasis on a distinct set of instructional goals when compared to faculty members who do not implement CUREs. CURE implementation was further associated with a range of instructional and departmental characteristics, including group-only student work, independent course development by faculty instructors, limited graduate TA support, and ACS certification of degree programs. Findings from this investigation point toward (1) a need for increased efforts focused on supporting CURE implementation, (2) productive avenues through which curriculum designers and communities of practice can provide this support, and (3) needed areas of research that will further inform these efforts. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email