Not the same CURE: Student experiences in course-based undergraduate research experiences vary by graduate teaching assistant

Dipping Your Toe in The CURE Pool: Longitudinal Tracking of Instructors Suggests Use of a Short-Duration CURE Can Catalyze Expansion to Longer CURE Experiences

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.

Developing scientific literacy with a cyclic independent study assisted CURE detecting SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed a high level of scientific illiteracy and mistrust that pervades the scientific and medical communities. This finding has proven the necessity of updating current methods used to expose undergraduates to research. The research in traditional course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) is limited by undergraduate time constraints, skill level, and course structure, and consequently it does not attain the learning objectives or the high-impact, relevant studies achieved in graduate-level laboratories using a cyclic trainee/trainer model. Although undergraduate independent study (ISY) research more closely matches the structure and learning objectives of graduate-level research, they are uncommon as professors and universities typically view them as a significant time and resource burden with limited return. Cyclic independent study-assisted CUREs (CIS-CUREs) combine many positive aspects of ISY graduate-level research, and CUREs by pre-training ISY research lead to facilitate CURE proposal and project semesters in a cyclic model. The CIS-CURE approach allowed undergraduate students at Stetson University to perform and disseminate more rigorous, involved, long-term, and challenging research projects, such as the surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater. In doing so, all students would have the opportunity to participate in a high-impact research project and consequently gain a more comprehensive training, reach higher levels of research dissemination, and increase their competitiveness after graduating. Together, CIS-CUREs generate graduates with higher scientific literacy and thus combat scientific mistrust in communities.

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.