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

Activity for CUREs to increase student understanding and application of responsible authorship and publication practices

Professional development of scientists is enhanced by training students in responsible conduct of research earlier in their careers. One aspect of responsible conduct of research is authorship ethics, which concerns granting of credit to those who make intellectual contributions to the research. The activity discussed in this article emphasizes how authorship ethics can be integrated with Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) and includes an adaption that could also be used for independent research students. The activity allows students to reflect upon inequalities and problems seen in scientific authorship, including gender bias, failure to credit effort (ghostwriters), and inclusion of authors that did not meaningfully contribute to the work (honorary/gift authorship). Themes seen in student reflections on how they could demonstrate ethics in authorship included: determining authorship by contribution, appropriate attributions on curriculum vitas (CV) and posters, different credit levels, understanding authorship criteria, and tracking contributions. Themes seen in student reflections on the importance of authorship were proper authorship credit distribution, authorship impacting career opportunities, and accountability in research. In the activity, students also created attributions for a poster to be presented from their research. We found that most students were able to create attributions that were correctly formatted, included the same authors, and positioned authors in the same order as other group members, matching what was presented on the finalized poster. We found that students' reflection on authorship and this professionalization of their activities in their CURE led to modest increases in their view of themselves as scientists.

Fostering student authorship skills in synthetic biology

Women and racial minorities are underrepresented in the synthetic biology community. Developing a scholarly identity by engaging in a scientific community through writing and communication is an important component for STEM retention, particularly for underrepresented individuals. Several excellent pedagogical tools have been developed to teach scientific literacy and to measure competency in reading and interpreting scientific literature. However, fewer tools exist to measure learning gains with respect to writing, or that teach the more abstract processes of peer review and scientific publishing, which are essential for developing scholarly identity and publication currency. Here we describe our approach to teaching scientific writing and publishing to undergraduate students within a synthetic biology course. Using gold standard practices in project-based learning, we created a writing project in which students became experts in a specific application area of synthetic biology with relevance to an important global problem or challenge. To measure learning gains associated with our learning outcomes, we adapted and expanded the Student Attitudes, Abilities, and Beliefs (SAAB) concept inventory to include additional questions about the process of scientific writing, authorship, and peer review. Our results suggest the project-based approach was effective in achieving the learning objectives with respect to writing and peer reviewed publication, and resulted in high student satisfaction and student self-reported learning gains. We propose that these educational practices could contribute directly to the development of scientific identity of undergraduate students as synthetic biologists, and will be useful in creating a more diverse synthetic biology research enterprise.

A CURE Lab in Introductory Biology at a Regional Comprehensive University Negatively Impacts Student Success in the Associated Lecture Course Among Students from Groups Underrepresented in Science

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have been proposed as a mechanism to democratize access to the benefits of apprentice-style scientific research to a broader diversity of students, promoting inclusivity and increasing student success and retention. As we evaluate CUREs, it is essential to explore their effectiveness within the environments of regional comprehensive universities and community colleges, because they are important access points for a wide variety of students. It is also important to address the potential influence of volunteer bias, where students can opt to enroll in either the CURE or a traditional lab, on the outcomes of CUREs. We evaluated a CURE at a regional comprehensive university under conditions both with and without volunteer bias. We find that nonvolunteer students report a lower sense of discovery and relevance of the CURE compared with students who volunteered for the course. Importantly, we also find that our replacement of the traditional lab class with a CURE resulted in lower scores on exams in the associated lecture course among students who are both BIPOC and Pell eligible. We call for additional research on the effects of CUREs at nonresearch-intensive institutions and without volunteer bias, to better understand the impact of these classes.

Upper-level inter-disciplinary microbiology CUREs increase student's scientific self-efficacy, scientific identity, and self-assessed skills

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) provide opportunities for undergraduate students to engage in authentic research and generally increase the participation rate of students in research. Students' participation in research has a positive impact on their science identity and self-efficacy, both of which can predict integration of students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), especially for underrepresented students. The main goal of this study was to investigate instructor-initiated CUREs implemented as upper-level elective courses in the Biomedical Sciences major. We hypothesized that these CUREs would (i) have a positive impact on students' scientific identity and self-efficacy and (ii) result in gains in students' self-assessed skills in laboratory science, research, and science communication. We used Likert-type surveys developed by Estrada et al. (14) under the Tripartite Integration Model of Social Influence to measure scientific identity, self-efficacy, and scientific value orientation. When data from all CUREs were combined, our results indicate that students' self-efficacy and science identity significantly increased after completion. Students' self-assessment of research and lab-related skills was significantly higher after completion of the CUREs. We also observed that prior to participation in the CUREs, students' self-assessment of molecular and bioinformatic skills was low, when compared with microbiological skills. This may indicate strengths and gaps in our curriculum that could be explored further.

DNA at the whim of the water: environmental DNA as a course-based undergraduate research experience

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) increase student access to high impact research experiences. CUREs engage students in the scientific process by learning how to pose scientific questions, develop hypotheses, and generate data to test them. Environmental DNA (eDNA) is a growing field of research that is gaining accessibility through decreasing laboratory costs, which can make a foundation for multiple, engaging CUREs. This manuscript describes three case studies that used eDNA in an upper year undergraduate course. The first focusses on a systematic literature review of eDNA metadata reporting. The second describes the biomonitoring of brook trout in southern Ontario using eDNA. The third involves eDNA metabarcoding for freshwater fish detection in southern Ontario. Undergraduates were involved in the development and execution of experiments, scientific communication, the peer review process, and fundraising. Through this manuscript, we show the novel application of eDNA CUREs and provide a roadmap for other instructors interested in implementing similar projects. Interviews with seven students from these courses indicate the benefits experienced from taking these courses. We argue that the use of eDNA in CUREs should be expanded in undergraduate biology programs due to the benefit to students and the increasing accessibility of this technology.

An online research immersion program to increase introductory science student confidence and science identity

The number of undergraduate students from underrepresented backgrounds enrolled in science and technology-related courses has increased over the past 20 years, but these students' persistence in STEM majors until graduation still lags behind the overall college population. Interventions like exposure to independent research, instruction using active learning, and connection within a scientific community have been shown to increase persistence and the development of science identity, especially for underrepresented minority students (URM), students with high financial need, and first-generation college students. However, exposure to research for introductory students can be expensive or challenging for an institution to provide and for some students to access. We designed Wintersession Research Week as a remotely taught, collaborative introduction to independent research for beginning undergraduate students, prioritizing those traditionally underrepresented in STEM (low income, first generation, and URM students). Because this program utilized graduate students as research mentors, we also provided training and mentoring to develop the next generation of science faculty. We found that the program helped undergraduate student participants to develop a scientific identity and increase confidence in their skills, and that graduate students found the experience valuable for their future teaching. We believe that elements of this program are adaptable to both virtual and in-person settings as an introduction to research, mentorship, and teaching for students and mentors.

Fly-CURE, a multi-institutional CURE using Drosophila, increases students' confidence, sense of belonging, and persistence in research

The Fly-CURE is a genetics-focused multi-institutional Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) that provides undergraduate students with hands-on research experiences within a course. Through the Fly-CURE, undergraduate students at diverse types of higher education institutions across the United States map and characterize novel mutants isolated from a genetic screen in Drosophila melanogaster. To date, more than 20 mutants have been studied across 20 institutions, and our scientific data have led to eleven publications with more than 500 students as authors. To evaluate the impact of the Fly-CURE experience on students, we developed and validated assessment tools to identify students' perceived research self-efficacy, sense of belonging in science, and intent to pursue additional research opportunities. Our data, collected over three academic years and involving 14 institutions and 480 students, show gains in these metrics after completion of the Fly-CURE across all student subgroups analyzed, including comparisons of gender, academic status, racial and ethnic groups, and parents' educational background. Importantly, our data also show differential gains in the areas of self-efficacy and interest in seeking additional research opportunities between Fly-CURE students with and without prior research experience, illustrating the positive impact of research exposure (dosage) on student outcomes. Altogether, our data indicate that the Fly-CURE experience has a significant impact on students' efficacy with research methods, sense of belonging to the scientific research community, and interest in pursuing additional research experiences.

Engaging students in a genetics course-based undergraduate research experience utilizing Caenorhabditis elegans in hybrid learning to explore human disease gene variants

Genetic analysis in model systems using bioinformatic approaches provides a rich context for a concrete and conceptual understanding of gene structure and function. With the intent to engage students in research and explore disease biology utilizing the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans model, we developed a semester-long course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) in a hybrid (online/in-person) learning environment-the gene-editing and evolutionary nematode exploration CURE (GENE-CURE). Using a combination of bioinformatic and molecular genetic tools, students performed structure-function analysis of disease-associated variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in human orthologs. With the aid of a series of workshop-style research sessions, students worked in teams of two to six members to identify a conserved VUS locus across species and design and test a polymerase chain reaction-based assay for targeted editing of a gene in the nematode and downstream genotyping. Research session discussions, responsible conduct of research training, electronic laboratory notebook, project reports, quizzes, and group poster presentations at a research symposium were assessed for mastery of learning objectives and research progress. Self-reflections were collected from students to assess engagement, science identity, and science efficacy. Qualitative analysis of these reflections indicated several gains suggesting that all students found many aspects of the GENE-CURE rewarding (learning process of research, self-confidence in research and science identity, and personal interest) and challenging (iterative research and failure, time management, COVID-19 pandemic, and life issues).

Preparing Teaching Assistants to Facilitate Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) in the Biological Sciences: A Call to Action

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) offer an expanding avenue to engage students in real-world scientific practices. Increasingly, CUREs are instructed by graduate teaching assistants (TAs), yet TAs may be underprepared to facilitate and face unique barriers when teaching CUREs. Consequently, unless TAs are provided professional development (PD) and resources to teach CUREs effectively, they and their students may not reap the assumed benefits of CURE instruction. Here, we describe three perspectives - that of the CURE TA, the CURE designer/facilitator, and the CURE student - that are collectively intended to inform the development of tentative components of CURE TA PD. We compare these perspectives to previous studies in the literature in an effort to identify commonalities across all sources and offer potential insights for advancing CURE TA PD efforts across a diversity of institutional environments. We propose that the most effective CURE TA PD programs will promote the use of CURE-specific instructional strategies as benchmarks for guiding change in teaching practices and should focus on three major elements: 1) enhancement of research and teaching acumen, 2) development of effective and inclusive mentoring practices, and 3) identification and understanding of the factors that make CUREs a unique learning experience.

Responsible and ethical conduct of research (RECR) diagnostic survey using case scenarios from biology course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs)

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) are increasingly becoming the first, and perhaps only, research experience for many biology students. Responsible and ethical conduct of research (RECR) is crucial for the integrity of scientific research and essential for students to have an understanding of the scientific process at any academic level. However, there is a current lack of RECR education in biology CUREs. To understand the level of RECR knowledge and skills in undergraduate students, we created a diagnostic survey that uses case scenarios designed to illustrate RECR issues in the CURE classroom. Analysis of students' responses indicated that the overall percentage of students who are able to effectively use RECR terminology and identify the impact of RECR violations on science integrity and ultimately on society is low. Furthermore, some students equated RECR violations to academic dishonesty, indicating difficulties separating the research and academic aspects of CUREs. This diagnostic tool can aid instructors in identifying gaps in student RECR knowledge for the subsequent development of RECR educational interventions, particularly to ensure the integrity of the research performed in CURE settings.

Can We Quantify If It's a CURE?

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) rapidly have become more common in biology laboratory courses. The effort to implement CUREs has stimulated attempts to differentiate CUREs from other types of laboratory teaching. The Laboratory Course Assessment Survey (LCAS) was developed to measure students' perceptions of how frequently they participate in activities related to iteration, discovery, broader relevance, and collaboration in their laboratory courses. The LCAS has been proposed as an instrument that can be used to define whether a laboratory course fits the criteria for a CURE or not. However, the threshold LCAS scores needed to define a course as a CURE are unclear. As a result, we examined variation in published LCAS scores among different laboratory course types. In addition, we examined the distribution of LCAS scores for students enrolled in our research-for-credit course. Overall, we found substantial variation in scores among CUREs and broad overlap among course types in scores related to all three scales measured by the LCAS. Furthermore, the mean LCAS scores for all course types fell within the main part of the distribution of scores for our mentored research students. These results suggest that the LCAS cannot be used to easily quantify whether a course is a CURE or not. We propose that the biology education community needs to move beyond trying to quantitatively identify whether a course is a CURE. Instead, we should use tools like the LCAS to investigate what students are actually doing in their laboratory courses and how those activities impact student outcomes.

Fly-CURE, a Multi-institutional CURE using Drosophila, Increases Students' Confidence, Sense of Belonging, and Persistence in Research

The Fly-CURE is a genetics-focused multi-institutional Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) that provides undergraduate students with hands-on research experiences within a course. Through the Fly-CURE, undergraduate students at diverse types of higher education institutions across the United States map and characterize novel mutants isolated from a genetic screen in Drosophila melanogaster. To evaluate the impact of the Fly-CURE experience on students, we developed and validated assessment tools to identify students' perceived research self-efficacy, sense of belonging in science, and intent to pursue additional research opportunities. Our data show gains in these metrics after completion of the Fly-CURE across all student subgroups analyzed, including comparisons of gender, academic status, racial and ethnic groups, and parents' educational background. Importantly, our data also show differential gains in the areas of self-efficacy and interest in seeking additional research opportunities between Fly-CURE students with and without prior research experience, illustrating the positive impact of research exposure (dosage) on student outcomes. Altogether, our data indicate that the Fly-CURE experience has a significant impact on students' efficacy with research methods, sense of belonging to the scientific community, and interest in pursuing additional research experiences.

A Versatile Psychoneuroimmunology Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience

The Psychoneuroimmunology Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (PNI CURE) was designed with the purpose of engaging undergraduate students in research and discovery. As part of this experience, students were assigned to a team based on their personal interests. Each team selected a psychosocial variable of interest (e.g., sleep, belongingness, stress, or happiness) and identified two well-validated questionnaires to assess it. Then, student volunteers donated blood samples and completed student-selected questionnaires via Qualtrics. The blood samples were assayed by the course instructor for proinflammatory cytokines. With the collected data, students 1) evaluated the association between peripheral inflammation and their psychosocial variable of interest and 2) created hypotheses regarding inflammation in the brain. Students' experimental results were reported in the form of a research manuscript and scientific poster, both of which comprised 15 percent of their course grade. Further, to evaluate the effectiveness of the PNI CURE, students were asked to complete assessment surveys before and after project implementation. Assessment results demonstrate that participating in the PNI CURE increased self-efficacy and research identity among students. Besides exposing undergraduates at UNC-CH to a comprehensive research experience, we hope to inspire neuroscience educators to adopt and adapt the PNI CURE as a mechanism to broaden undergraduate research opportunities in neuroscience.

Methylothon: a Versatile Course-Based High School Research Experience in Microbiology and Bioinformatics with Pink Bacteria

Methylothon is an inquiry-based high school learning module in microbial ecology, molecular biology, and bioinformatics that centers around pink-pigmented plant-associated methylotrophic bacteria. Here, we present an overview of the module's learning goals, describe course resources (available for public use at http://methylothon.com), and relate lessons learned from adapting Methylothon for remote learning during the pandemic in spring of 2021. This curriculum description is intended not only for instructors but also for microbial ecology researchers with an interest in conducting K-12 outreach. The original in-person version of the module allows students to isolate their own strains of methylotrophic bacteria from plants they sample from the environment, to identify these using PCR, sequencing, and phylogenetic analysis, and to contribute their strains to original research in a university lab. The adapted version strengthens the focus on bioinformatics and increases its flexibility and accessibility by making the lab portion optional and adopting free web-based tools. Student feedback and graded assignments from spring 2021 revealed that the lesson was especially effective at introducing the concepts of BLAST and phylogenetic trees and that students valued and felt inspired by the opportunity to conduct hands-on work and to participate in community science.

Students' Emotions, Perceived Coping, and Outcomes in Response to Research-Based Challenges and Failures in Two Sequential CUREs

The ability to navigate scientific obstacles is widely recognized as a hallmark of a scientific disposition and is one predictor of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics persistence for early-career scientists. However, the development of this competency in undergraduate research has been largely underexplored. This study addresses this gap by examining introductory students' emotional and behavioral responses to research-related challenges and failures that occur in two sequential research-based courses. We describe commonly reported emotions, coping responses, and perceived outcomes and examine relationships between these themes, student demographics, and course enrollment. Students commonly experience frustration, confusion, and disappointment when coping with challenges and failures. Yet the predominance of students report coping responses likely to be adaptive in academic contexts despite experiencing negative emotions. Being enrolled in the second course of a research-based course sequence was related to several shifts in response to challenges during data collection, including less reporting of confusion and fewer reports of learning to be cautious from students. Overall, students in both the first and second courses reported many positive outcomes indicating improvements in their ability to cope with challenge and failure. We assert that educators can improve research-based educational courses by scaffolding students' research trials, failures, and iterations to support students' perseverance.

A Mixed-Methods Study of a Poster Presentation Activity, Students' Science Identity, and Science Communication Self-Efficacy under Remote Teaching Conditions

Disseminating and communicating scientific findings is an acknowledged part of the research experience, but few science programs include explicit undergraduate curricula for practicing oral science communication. Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) can provide opportunities for students to practice science communication, but few studies describe or assess authentic oral science communication activities within CUREs, and none do so under hybrid conditions. The existing literature lacks substantial evidence for how science communication activities impact students' science identity and science communication self-efficacy, specifically regarding research posters. To address this, we collected students' quantitative and qualitative perceptions of science identity and science communication self-efficacy in a hybrid CURE and collected students' qualitative perceptions of presenting their research remotely at a virtual poster symposium. We found that students' science identity and science communication self-efficacy improved significantly, as well as benefits and complaints about presenting research virtually, namely, reduced stress, a more comfortable atmosphere, but a murkier communication channel. Our results should prove valuable to educators interested in improving students' science identity and science communication self-efficacy, especially when limited to a virtual or hybrid format, as affective factors strongly impact students' persistence in science.

Demonstrating core molecular biology principles using GST-GFP in a semester-long laboratory course

Undergraduate laboratory courses are essential to teaching core principles in STEM. This course, Quantitative Biological Methods, provides a unique approach to teaching molecular biology research techniques to students, in a laboratory that is delivered in a sequence that parallels standard biomedical research laboratory protocols. Students attend a lecture where they are taught the essential principles of biomedical research, and a lab where they learn to use laboratory equipment, perform experiments, and purify and quantify DNA and proteins. The course begins with an introduction to laboratory safety, pipetting, centrifugation, spectrophotometry, and other basic laboratory techniques. Next, the lab focuses on the purification and analysis of glutathione S-transferase (GST) fused to green fluorescent protein (GFP) from an Escherichia coli lysate. Students study this GST-GFP fusion protein and perform protein quantification, enzyme assays, chromatography, fluorescent detection, normalization, SDS-PAGE, and western blotting. Students then learn recombinant DNA technology using the GST-GFP vector that was the source of the fusion protein in the prior labs, and perform ligation, transformation of E. coli cells, blue/white screening, DNA purification via a miniprep, PCR, DNA quantification, restriction enzyme digestion, and agarose gel electrophoresis. Students write laboratory reports to demonstrate an understanding of the principles of the laboratory methods, and they must present and critically analyze their data. The lab methods described herein aim to emphasize the core molecular biology principles and techniques, prepare students for work in a biomedical research laboratory, and introduce students to both GST and GFP, two versatile laboratory proteins.

An introductory biology research-rich laboratory course shows improvements in students' research skills, confidence, and attitudes

As part of a wider reform to scaffold quantitative and research skills throughout the biology major, we introduced course-based undergraduate research experiences (CURE) in sections of a large-enrollment introductory biology laboratory course in a mid-level, public, minority-serving institution. This initiative was undertaken as part of the in the National Science Foundation / Council for Undergraduate Research Transformations Project. Student teams performed two or three experiments, depending on semester. They designed, implemented, analyzed, revised and iterated, wrote scientific paper-style reports, and gave oral presentations. We tested the impact of CURE on student proficiency in experimental design and statistical reasoning, and student research confidence and attitudes over two semesters. We found that students in the CURE sections met the reformed learning objectives for experimental design and statistical reasoning. CURE students also showed higher levels of experimental design proficiency, research self-efficacy, and more expert-like scientific mindsets compared to students in a matched cohort with the traditional design. While students in both groups described labs as a positive experience in end-of-semester reflections, the CURE group showed a high level of engagement with the research process. Students in CURE sections identified components of the research process that were difficult, while also reporting enjoying and valuing research. This study demonstrates improved learning, confidence, and attitudes toward research in a challenging CURE laboratory course where students had significant autonomy combined with appropriate support at a diverse public university.

An at-home laboratory in plant biology designed to engage students in the process of science

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a transition to remote delivery of courses that lack immersive hands-on research experiences for undergraduate science students, resulting in a scientific research skills gap. In this report, we present an option for an inclusive and authentic, hands-on research experience that all students can perform off-campus. Biology students in a semester-long (13 weeks) sophomore plant physiology course participated in an at-home laboratory designed to study the impacts of nitrogen addition on growth rates and root nodulation by wild nitrogen-fixing Rhizobia in Pisum sativum (Pea) plants. This undergraduate research experience, piloted in the fall semester of 2020 in a class with 90 students, was created to help participants learn and practice scientific research skills during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the learning outcomes associated with this at-home research experience were: (1) generate a testable hypothesis, (2) design an experiment to test the hypothesis, (3) explain the importance of biological replication, (4) perform meaningful statistical analyses using R, and (5) compose a research paper to effectively communicate findings to a general biology audience. Students were provided with an at-home laboratory kit containing the required materials and reagents, which were chosen to be accessible and affordable in case students were unable to access our laboratory kit. Students were guided through all aspects of research, including hypothesis generation, data collection, and data analysis, with video tutorials and live virtual sessions. This at-home laboratory provided students an opportunity to practice hands-on research with the flexibility to collect and analyze their own data in a remote setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. This, or similar laboratories, could also be used as part of distance learning biology courses.

Student Perceptions of Authoring a Publication Stemming from a Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE)

Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) engage students in authentic research experiences in a course format and can sometimes result in the publication of that research. However, little is known about student-author perceptions of CURE publications. In this study, we examined how students perceive they benefit from authoring a CURE publication and what they believe is required for authorship of a manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal. All 16 students who were enrolled in a molecular genetics CURE during their first year of college participated in semistructured interviews during their fourth year. At the time of the interviews, students had been authors of a CURE publication for a year and a half. Students reported that they benefited personally and professionally from the publication. Students had varying perceptions of what is required for authorship, but every student thought that writing the manuscript was needed, and only two mentioned needing to approve the final draft. Additionally, we identified incomplete conceptions that students had about CURE publications. This work establishes student-perceived benefits from CURE publications and highlights the need for authorship requirements to be explicitly addressed in CUREs.

Antiracist Opportunities in the Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education: Considerations for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Authors in the Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education (JMBE) have demonstrated a clear commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) through commentaries, instructional approaches, and research. However, analysis of JMBE literature using Kendi's antiracist framework (How To Be an Antiracist, 2019) offers additional opportunities for growth. These opportunities are discussed and framed under five emergent conceptual categories (ECCs). First, capitalistic goals (e.g., productivity) are often drivers for DEI initiatives but disproportionately benefit those with power. Humanity-centered reasons, like honoring community values, are also important motivations. Second, faculty are often targeted as primary agents of change for DEI, but more powerful stakeholders such as department and institutional leadership can also implement equitable policies and practices to widen the impact of DEI initiatives. Third, study scopes are sometimes focused on the outcomes of inequity (e.g., lower retention rates for students of color) rather than the systemic causes (e.g., exclusivity of science). While outcomes are important to research, studies should create clear connections and distinctions between the systems and symptoms of inequity. Fourth, active learning and authentic research experiences are not automatically inclusive and do not necessarily validate students' identities. Such approaches may be more impactful when tailored for context and student background. Finally, language and communication can have broad impacts on DEI efforts. As a community, we may need to be more critical of our shared language and communication. This review discusses the five ECCs in depth and offers next steps for supporting DEI across the biology and microbiology education community.

Bridging Trade-Offs between Traditional and Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences by Building Student Communication Skills, Identity, and Interest

Undergraduate research plays an important role in the development of science students. The two most common forms of undergraduate research are those in traditional settings (such as internships and research-for-credit in academic research labs) and course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). Both of these settings offer many benefits to students, yet they have unique strengths and weaknesses that lead to trade-offs. Traditional undergraduate research experiences (UREs) offer the benefits of personalized mentorship and experience in a professional setting, which help build students' professional communication skills, interest, and scientific identity. However, UREs can reach only a limited number of students. On the other end of the trade-off, CUREs offer research authenticity in a many-to-one classroom research environment that reaches more students. CUREs provide real research experience in a collaborative context, but CUREs are not yet necessarily equipping students with all of the experiences needed to transition into a research lab environment outside the classroom. We propose that CURE instructors can bridge trade-offs between UREs and CUREs by deliberately including learning goals and activities in CUREs that recreate the benefits of UREs, specifically in the areas of professional communication, scientific identify, and student interest. To help instructors implement this approach, we provide experience- and evidence-based guidance for student-centered, collaborative learning opportunities.

AUTHENTIC RESEARCH IN THE CLASSROOM INCREASES APPRECIATION FOR PLANTS IN UNDERGRADUATE BIOLOGY STUDENTS

Engaging students in authentic research increases student knowledge, develops STEM skills, such as data analysis and scientific communication, and builds community. Creating authentic research opportunities in plant biology might be particularly crucial in addressing plant awareness disparity (formerly known as plant blindness), producing graduates with botanical literacy, and preparing students for plant-focused careers. Our consortium created four CUREs (course-based undergraduate research experiences) focused on dual themes of plant biology and global change, designed to be utilized by early and late-career undergraduates across a variety of educational settings. We implemented these CURES for four semesters, in a total of 15 courses, at four institutions. Pre- and post-course assessments used the Affective Elements of Science Learning Questionnaire and parts of a "plant blindness" instrument to quantify changes in scientific self-efficacy, science values, scientific identity, and plant awareness or knowledge. Qualitative assessment also queried self-efficacy, science values, and scientific identity. Data revealed significant and positive shifts in awareness of and interest in plants across institutions. Quantitative gains in self-efficacy and scientific identity, however, were only found at two of four institutions tested. This project demonstrates that implementing plant CUREs can produce affective and cognitive gains across institutional types and course levels. Focusing on real-world research questions that capture students' imaginations and connect to their sense of place could create plant awareness while anchoring students in scientific identities. While simple interventions can alleviate plant awareness disparity, implementing multiple CUREs per course, or focusing more on final CURE products, could promote larger and more consistent affective gains across institutions.