Search for: All records

PurposeThe National Science Foundation (NSF) Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) programs are traditionally delivered in-person and full-time (40 h per week) for 10 weeks during the summer. However, this type of format has the potential to limit broader student participation. This study aims to compare learning assessment data between a traditional NSF REU (10 weeks of summer, full-time, in-person) to an alternative NSF REU delivered virtually, part-time and over 10 months as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Design/methodology/approachA retrospective pre-then-post survey was completed to assess perceived learning gains for each REU program. Three learning gains categories were assessed: entrepreneurial competencies, career goals and research skill development.T-tests were used to evaluate a difference in means between pre and post. FindingsFindings show the greatest quantity of learning gains within the alternative program delivery. Moreover, a larger quantity of learning gains was perceived within the first semester of the alternative program delivery compared to the second semester. Practical implicationsThe authors propose the NSF should be intentional about trying new approaches to REU programs delivery, including duration and format, as a way to broaden participation in engineering. Originality/valueThis study is original in that it is the first of its kind to assess an alternative REU program delivery (allowed only because of the COVID-19 pandemic) in comparison to traditional REU program delivery.