Discovery and Broad Relevance May Be Insignificant Components of Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) for Non-Biology Majors

Innovate and empower: the malate dehydrogenase course-based undergraduate research experiences and community of practice

College science programs exhibit high rates of student attrition, especially among Students of Color, women, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and those with disabilities. Many of the reasons students choose to leave or feel pushed out of science can be mitigated through participation in faculty-mentored research. However, faculty resources are limited, and not every student has access to faculty mentoring due to systemic or structural barriers. By bringing authentic scientific research into the classroom context, course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) expand the number of students who participate in research and provide benefits similar to faculty-mentored research. Instructors also benefit from teaching CUREs. Using a systematic review of 14 manuscripts concerning the Malate Dehydrogenase CUREs Community (MCC) and malate dehydrogenase (MDH) CUREs, we demonstrate that CUREs can be implemented flexibly, are authentic research experiences, generate new scientific discoveries, and improve student outcomes. Additionally, CURE communities offer substantial advantages to faculty wishing to implement CUREs.

Classification of Features across Five CURE Networks Reveals Opportunities to Improve Course Design, Instruction, and Equity

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are tools used to introduce students to authentic participation in science. Several specific CUREs have been shown to benefit students' interest and retention in the biological sciences. Nevertheless, CUREs vary greatly in terms of their context, methodology, and degree of research authenticity, so different types of CUREs may differently influence student outcomes. This programmatic diversity poses a challenge to educators who want to better understand which course components and features are reliably present in a CURE curriculum. To address these issues, we identified, catalogued, and classified 112 potential features of CUREs across the biosciences. To develop the list, we interviewed instructors experienced with teaching individual and large networked CUREs across a diversity of the biological disciplines, including: Squirrel-Net (field-based animal behavior), SEA-PHAGES (wet lab microbiology and computational microbiology), Tiny Earth (environmental and wet lab microbiology), PARE (environmental microbiology), and the Genomics Education Partnership (eukaryotic computational biology). Twenty-five interviewees contributed expert content in terms of CURE features and classification of those items into an organized list. The resulting list's categories encompasses student experiences with the following: (i) the scientific process; (ii) technical aspects of science; (iii) the professional development associated with research; and (iv) building scientific identity. The most striking insight was that CUREs vary widely in terms of which features they contain, since different CUREs will by necessity have different approaches to science and student involvement. We also identified several features commonly thought to be crucial to CUREs yet have ambiguous definitions. This ambiguity can potentially confound efforts to make CUREs research-authentic and aligned with the central goals of science. We disambiguate these terms and represent their varied meanings throughout the classification. We also provide instructor-friendly supplementary worksheets along with considerations for instructors interested in expanding their CURE course design, instruction, and equity.

Current Status and Implementation of Science Practices in Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs): A Systematic Literature Review

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses within the years 2000 through 2020. The goals of this review were to 1) create a resource of STEM CUREs identified by their discipline, subdiscipline, and level; 2) determine the activities included in each CURE, particularly the primary components listed in the CURE definition as well as specific science practices we identified as key to scientific reasoning; and 3) identify the next steps needed in CURE creation and implementation. Our review found 242 CURE curricula described in 220 total articles, with most described in biology, although STEM disciplines, including chemistry and biochemistry, have begun to publish CURE curricula as well. We also found that most CUREs include the primary components. However, when we look at the specific science practices essential to scientific reasoning, we found that these are less common in many CUREs and are implemented differently. We encourage CURE authors to consider including these science practices and potentially measuring their impact on student outcomes. The present work provides a summary of the current published CUREs, their disciplines, course levels, primary components, and specific science practices.

Students' Experiences and Perceptions of the Scientific Research Culture after Participating in Different Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience Models

Undergraduate students interact with the culture of scientific research when they participate in direct mentorship experiences and laboratory courses such as course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). Much work has been done to explore how CUREs impact the interest, motivation, and retention of undergraduate students in science. However, little work has been done exploring students' experiences and perceptions of the culture of scientific research in the CURE context, and how different CURE models representing different subfields of science impact these experiences and perceptions. This study explored which cultural aspects of scientific research students experienced after participating in a CURE and whether their perceptions of those cultural aspects differed based on students' participation in a bench-based or computer-based research project. Students discussed the Practices and Norms/Expectations of scientific research most frequently. Students in the bench-based and computer-based project areas mentioned different cultural aspects as important to their experiences. Bench-based and computational students also had different perceptions of some of the same cultural aspects, including Teamwork, Freedom & Independence, and Persistence & Resilience. These results suggest that different CURE models differentially impact students' experiences and perceptions of the culture of scientific research, which has implications for examining how students move into scientific research.

Repetition Is Important to Students and Their Understanding during Laboratory Courses That Include Research

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) provide students with opportunities for the same gains that apprenticed research with faculty members offers. As their popularity increases, it is important that critical elements of CUREs be supported by thoughtful design. Student experiences in CUREs can provide important insights into why CUREs are so effective. We present evidence from students who participated in CUREs at the introductory, intermediate, and advanced levels, as well as from graduate teaching assistants for an introductory lab course that included a CURE. Students and teaching assistants describe repetition as a valuable element in CUREs and other laboratory experiences. We used student work and open-ended interviews to identify which of five previously described elements of CUREs students found important. Because repetition was particularly salient, we characterized how students described repetition as they experienced it in courses that contained full-length CUREs or "micro-CUREs." In prompted interviews, students described how repetition in CUREs provided cognitive (learning concepts) and practical (learning technical skills) value. Recent graduates who had participated in CUREs at each level of their biology education were particularly aware that they placed value on repetition and acknowledged it as motivational in their own learning. Many students described repetition in metacognitive terms, which also suggests that as students advance through laboratory and CURE curricula, their understanding of how repetition supports their learning becomes more sophisticated. Finally, we integrated student descriptions to suggest ways in which repetition can be designed into CUREs or other laboratory courses to support scientific learning and enhance students' sense of scientific identity.

The Relationship between Perceptions of Instructional Practices and Student Self-Efficacy In Guided-Inquiry Laboratory Courses

Science self-efficacy, a student's confidence in being able to perform scientific practices, interacts with science identity and outcomes expectations, leading to improved performance in science courses, persistence in science majors, and ultimately, the pursuit of advanced training in the sciences. Inquiry-based laboratory courses have been shown to improve undergraduate student self-efficacy, but the mechanisms involved and specific components of instructional practices that lead to improved self-efficacy are not clear. In the current study, we determined whether student and faculty perceptions of laboratory instructional practices (scientific synthesis, science process skills, and instructor-directed teaching) were related to postsemester self-efficacy across 19 guided-inquiry laboratory courses from 11 different institutions. Self-efficacy related to science literacy increased significantly from the beginning of the semester to the end of the semester. Variation in individual student perceptions of instructional practices within a course were significantly related to differences in student self-efficacy at the end of the semester, but not average student perceptions or faculty perceptions of their own practices across courses. The importance of individual student perceptions suggests that faculty should engage with students during curricular development. Furthermore, faculty need to use noncontent talk to reinforce the science practices students are engaging in during inquiry-based laboratory courses.

Open Inquiry versus Broadly Relevant Short-Term Research Experiences for Non-Biology Majors

Undergraduate student participation in course-based research experiences results in many positive outcomes, but there is a lack of evidence demonstrating which elements of a research experience are necessary, especially for non-biology majors. Broad relevance is one element that can be logistically challenging to incorporate into research experiences in large-enrollment courses. We investigated the impacts of broad relevance in a short-term research experience in an introductory biology course for non-majors. Students either participated in an open-inquiry research experience (OI-RE), where they developed their own research question, or a broadly relevant research experience (BR-RE), where they investigated a question assigned to them that was relevant to an ongoing research project. We found a significant association between the type of research project experienced and students' preference for an experience, with half of the students in the OI-RE group and nearly all students in the BR-RE group preferring a broadly relevant research experience. However, since science confidence increased over the course for both groups, these findings indicate that while students who participated in a BR-RE valued it, broadly relevant research experiences may not be necessary for positive outcomes for non-majors.

Is Community Relevance Enough? Civic and Science Identity Impact of Microbiology CUREs Focused on Community Environmental Justice

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) often involve a component where the outcomes of student research are broadly relevant to outside stakeholders. We wanted to see if building courses around an environmental justice issue relevant to the local community would impact students' sense of civic engagement and appreciation of the relevance of scientific research to the community. In this quasi-experimental study, we assessed civic engagement and scientific identity gains (N = 98) using pre- and post-semester surveys and open-ended interview responses in three different CUREs taught simultaneously at three different universities. All three CURES were focused on an environmental heavy metal pollution issue predominantly affecting African-Americans in Birmingham, Alabama. While we found increases in students' sense of science efficacy and identity, our team was unable to detect meaningful changes in civic engagement levels, all of which were initially quite high. However, interviews suggested that students were motivated to do well in their research because the project was of interest to outside stakeholders. Our observations suggest that rather than directly influencing students' civic engagement, the "broadly relevant" component of our CUREs engaged their pre-existing high levels of engagement to increase their engagement with the material, possibly influencing gains in science efficacy and science identity. Our observations are consistent with broader community relevance being an important component of CURE success, but do not support our initial hypothesis that CURE participation would influence students' attitudes toward the civic importance of science.

Leveraging public data to offer online inquiry opportunities

Inquiry activities have become increasingly common in Ecology and Evolution courses, but the rapid shift to remote instruction for many faculty members in response to the COVID-19 pandemic has created new challenges for maintaining these student-centered activities in a distance learning format. Moving forward, many instructors will be asked to create flexible course structures that allow for a mix of different teaching modalities and will be looking for resources to support student inquiry in both online and in-person settings. Here, we propose the use of data-driven inquiry activities as a flexible option for offering students experiences to build career-relevant skills and learn fundamental ecological concepts. We share lessons learned from our experiences teaching a two-semester course-based research experience in global change ecology that leverages publicly available datasets to engage students in broadly relevant scientific inquiry.

In a "Scientist Spotlight" Intervention, Diverse Student Identities Matter

We report on a brief, simple, online course intervention designed to reduce identity gaps and help students see their "possible selves" in working scientists. Students (n = 238) in a large-enrollment, introductory biology course for nonmajors were assigned nine podcasts, distributed throughout the semester. These podcasts each featured a scientist telling a "true, personal story about science," and we intentionally selected podcasts featuring scientists from diverse backgrounds. We hypothesized that this intervention would serve to broaden student perceptions of science and scientists, and we used a mixed-methods approach to analyze (a) survey data and (b) short written responses about how these podcasts impacted students' views of the people who do science. Student survey responses confirm that students overwhelmingly found the podcasts valuable, engaging, and relatable, and student impressions varied as a function of student identity (gender, religiosity, sexual orientation, etc.). Further, these podcasts changed student perceptions of the sort of people who do science. This work builds on earlier findings and expands the current work to include a look at how students from a range of different identities-hidden and visible-respond to a simple intervention designed to counter stereotypes about scientists.

Students Who Analyze Their Own Data in a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) Show Gains in Scientific Identity and Emotional Ownership of Research

While it has been established that course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) lead to student benefits, it is less clear what aspects of CUREs lead to such gains. In this study, we aimed to understand the effect of students analyzing their own data, compared with students analyzing data that had been collected by professional scientists. We compared the experiences of students in a CURE investigating whether the extinction risk status of terrestrial mammals and birds is associated with their ecological traits. Students in the CURE were randomly assigned to analyze either data that they had collected or data previously collected by professional scientists. All other aspects of the student experience were designed to be identical. We found that students who analyzed their own data showed significantly greater gains in scientific identity and emotional ownership than students who analyzed data collected by professional scientists.

The Impact of Broadly Relevant Novel Discoveries on Student Project Ownership in a Traditional Lab Course Turned CURE

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have been shown to lead to multiple student benefits, but much is unknown about how CUREs lead to specific student outcomes. In this study, we examined the extent to which students making "broadly relevant novel discoveries" impacted student project ownership by comparing the experiences of students in a CURE and a traditional lab course. The CURE and traditional lab were similar in most aspects; students were exposed to an identical curriculum taught by the same instructor. However, there was one major difference between the two types of courses: the type of data that the students produced. Students in the traditional lab characterized the immune system of wild-type mice, thereby confirming results already known to the scientific community, while students in the CURE characterized the immune system of a mutant strain of mice, which produced broadly relevant novel discoveries. Compared with traditional lab students, CURE students reported higher cognitive and emotional ownership over their projects. Students' perceptions of collaboration and making broadly relevant novel discoveries were significantly and positively related to their cognitive and emotional ownership. This work provides insight into the importance of integrating opportunities for broadly relevant novel discoveries in lab courses.

iCURE (iterative course-based undergraduate research experience): A case-study

Several models suggest ways to expose undergraduates at minority serving institutions or institutions with limited research infrastructures to the iterative process of research. Apprentice-based research experiences allow students to work one-on-one with a research mentor in the hands-on discovery process, but with teaching being a priority for faculty at the aforementioned institutions, financial, spatial, and time limitations for research progress exist. Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) provide opportunities for a greater number of undergraduates to become familiar with the questions, techniques, and failure involved in research. However, designing projects that a group of students can complete in a semester can be challenging. Inclusive Research Education Communities are intended to promote retention in STEM courses for early college students but have limited benefit for upper-level courses. We sought to create an iterative CURE between fall semester BIOL3900 at the University of North Texas and spring semester CHE397 at Bethel University (Saint Paul, MN) to promote collaboration between unique learning communities. The research goal was to use a tobacco (Nicotiana benthamiana) transient expression system as a platform to test gene functions and to engineer valuable bioproducts in plant vegetative tissues. The outcomes of this 2-year integrative module included novel discoveries leading to publications in peer-reviewed journals, cost benefits due to shared resources, continual movement of the project, course-based training for future independent research projects, and improved student attitudes about research. © 2019 International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 47(5):565-572, 2019.

Computer-Based and Bench-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Produce Similar Attitudinal Outcomes

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.

Authentic Inquiry through Modeling in Biology (AIM-Bio): An Introductory Laboratory Curriculum That Increases Undergraduates' Scientific Agency and Skills

Providing opportunities for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics undergraduates to engage in authentic scientific practices is likely to influence their view of science and may impact their decision to persist through graduation. Laboratory courses provide a natural place to introduce students to scientific practices, but existing curricula often miss this opportunity by focusing on confirming science content rather than exploring authentic questions. Integrating authentic science within laboratory courses is particularly challenging at high-enrollment institutions and community colleges, where access to research-active faculty may be limiting. The Authentic Inquiry through Modeling in Biology (AIM-Bio) curriculum presented here engages students in authentic scientific practices through iterative cycles of model generation, testing, and revision. AIM-Bio university and community college students demonstrated their ability to propose diverse models for biological phenomena, formulate and address hypotheses by designing and conducting experiments, and collaborate with classmates to revise models based on experimental data. Assessments demonstrated that AIM-Bio students had an enhanced sense of project ownership and greater identification as scientists compared with students in existing laboratory courses. AIM-Bio students also experienced measurable gains in their nature of science understanding and skills for doing science. Our results suggest AIM-Bio as a potential alternative to more resource-intensive curricula with similar outcomes.