Search for: All records

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. 

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.