FIGURE 5 - uploaded by Jessica Dewey
Content may be subject to copyright.
Comparison of students' perceptions of Persistence & Resilience; N = total number of responses coded as Persistence & Resilience. Those responses were separated by project area, and the percent of those coded responses that were in response to each interview question was calculated.
Source publication
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. Howev...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... of the computational students' responses that were coded as Persistence & Resilience (NE8) were in response to the challenge question ( Figure 5). For example, one student said, "You run through errors that you don't really expect to run into. ...
Context 2
... in the bench-based project areas found Persistence & Resilience to be less challenging. On average, a third of the bench-based students' responses that were coded as Persistence & Resilience were in response to the challenge question (average of 32% of responses mentioning Persistence & Resilience; Figure 5). One student said, "It can be challenging when you fail and you're like 'Okay, what did we do wrong? ...
Context 3
... & Resilience (NE8). On average, bench-based students talked about Persistence & Resilience (NE8) as a takeaway three times more than computational students ( Figure 5). Between 40% and 57% of the bench-based students' responses that were coded as Persistence & Resilience (NE8) were about this aspect being valuable to learn, while computational students only mentioned this aspect as a takeaway twice. ...
Citations
... Also essential to the development of a student's STEM identity and retention in a STEM program is the "border crossing" process through which the student enters the culture of scientific research. Border crossing highlights the difficulties any newcomer has becoming a part of a new community, acknowledging the process through which a newcomer builds an identity within their new community (Dewey et al., 2022). Border crossing can be difficult in STEM fields, given the complex cultural framework and typical lack of prior exposure for incoming students (Dewey et al., 2021). ...
... This design aims to work with students to tailor their experiences in the program to their specific set of circumstances through a multi-tiered mentoring model and mentoring sessions developed with direct input from the students. The program expects this extended involvement and emphasis on community will be instrumental to the formation of the students' STEM identities (Dewey et al., 2022). ...
Introduction
A research and mentoring program was developed to provide local first-generation students, students returning to school after a professional experience, and underrepresented minority students resources and relationships to guide them toward a STEM degree from a four-year university.
Methods
A multi-tiered mentoring community was formed including direct mentoring from graduate students and faculty advisors, peer mentoring among undergraduate students from different colleges and universities, and high school students to increase the accessibility of research opportunities for this demographic. Local students were recruited from Northwest Arkansas Community College and Upward Bound to combine community college and high school students in a novel manner. The programs were integrated whenever possible to emphasize peer mentoring, including mentoring lunches, research meetings, presentation sessions, conference presentations, and professional development mentoring sessions.
Results
On the post-program survey, students indicated the community formed in the program supported their STEM identity development, provided them with quality relationships, and developed skills valuable to completion of a STEM degree. This identity development was further evidenced by the students presenting their work at a conference and obtaining additional research positions after the summer program ended.
Conclusion
The post-program scores and continued efforts of different demographics of students to pursue STEM highlight the versatility of the multi-tiered mentoring community model to serve students from different ages, backgrounds, and demographics.
... Though only a few studies in the review aimed to build up a structure of research culture, all boiled down the structure to several components: three categories -Practices, Norms/ Expectations, Values/Belief (Dewey et al., 2022); three layers of collaborative research culture -The roots, the fields, and the fruits of collaboration (Gasson & Bruce, 2019); and layers of research culture -mainstream culture outside an institution, overarching climate of different institutions, departmental cultures, microcultures created in research labs, and individual cultures. The findings are in close compliance with the previous research where a framework of the development of a research culture was constructed in the similar tune and entailed three domains: (1) The three missions of the university -"Trifocal function University"; (2) the individual researcher's knowledge, skills, values, and attributes -"Individual attributes"; (3) all characteristics of the university -"Institutional Attributes and Policies" (Johnson & Louw, 2014). ...
Introduction: Research culture is the core of many processes in science. It is a broad concept presumably entailing practices, traditions, norms, etc. that prevail among researchers and other stakeholders in the field. Its definition, architecture, and taxonomy are essential in generating and pursuing scientific policies at universities and countries. As there is a lack of comprehensive reviews on research culture, the present publication aspires to fill the existing gap in the knowledge. This review aims to define research culture and build an architecture of research culture based on the relevant literature indexed in the Scopus database. Method: The problem, concept, and context (PCC) framework was applied to establish an effective search strategy and word the research questions corresponding to the aim. Based on Arksey and O'Malley's methodology (2005) and PRISMA checklist (2020) for systematic reviews, the authors sorted out 56 relevant publications for systematic scoping review. In addition, a bibliometric analysis was applied to examine the field. Results: Using a bibliometric analysis, the 56 publications were distributed by year, country, most prolific authors, sources, research fields, affiliation, and type of publication. With the help of VOSviewer, the authors singled out four thematic clusters (research culture; medical and biomedical research, methodology and research ethics, and clinical studies and human experiments). After synthesizing the data extracted from the documents under review, research culture was defined; components of research culture were singled out and summed up; and a framework of research culture was made up. The authors analysed the review findings in contrast with other research, offering their own comprehensive definition of research culture, its taxonomy, and an architecture of research culture. Conclusion: The current review adds to the understanding of research culture, its gist, component classification. The limitation related to the period of review (2019-2024) may be overcome by further reviews of relevant publications from a historic perspective that would broaden perceptions of the origin of modern research culture and its negative aspects.
... There are many examples of CUREs in the pedagogical literature, and they are well-known as a high-impact practice that have shown increases in student success (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20), persistence (15,18,(21)(22)(23)(24)(25), and retention (17,21,26,27), as well as closing achievement gaps for underrepresented populations (18,19,(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33). They also represent a way of providing students with authentic research experiences at intuitions that may not have traditional research opportunities or funding for such activities (19,28). ...
Increasing student interest and success in STEM education is a top priority for many postsecondary educational institutions. One well-documented approach to both priorities is to have students participate in a Course Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE). Faculty from several technical colleges and universities in Wisconsin teamed up with the Tiny Earth organization to offer a CURE to address the search for new antibiotics. Students enrolled in undergraduate microbiology courses engaged in research and participated in community outreach. To involve the community, faculty from various institutions joined an NFL team, the Green Bay Packers, and created the Tiny Earth in Titletown symposium. Here, students presented their work via scientific posters, to community and industry members, and networked with other scientists from around the region. The Tiny Earth in Titletown symposium started in 2018, was held again in 2019, and returned in 2022 following a 2-year hiatus due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Record attendance in 2022 suggests that community outreach and education may be helping restore trust in science that was lost during the pandemic.
... Active learning environments, such as CRE programs, achieve positive academic outcomes (Lopatto, 2007;Russell et al., 2007;Shaffer et al., 2014) through multiple elements that impact academic belonging, which has been defined as "the extent to which individuals feel like a valued, accepted and a legitimate member in their academic domain" (Lewis et al., 2016). Numerous studies have shown the beneficial impact of CRE on student diversity and equitable access, including increased positive attitudes towards research (Osborne et al., 2003;Harrison et al., 2011;Brabec et al., 2018), enhanced selfefficacy (Chemers et al., 2011;Auchincloss et al., 2014;Carpi et al., 2017;Martin et al., 2021), the development of teamwork skills (Kapp, 2009;Hanauer and Hatfull, 2015;Dewey et al., 2022), and increased cultural sensitivity by introducing students of varying backgrounds to research regardless of their race or gender (Micari et al., 2007;Bangera and Brownell, 2014;Collins et al., 2019). The student experience survey employed to help measure the impact of our intervention includes an assessment of the association between these factors and participation in CRE courses. ...
Introduction
We describe herein a large-scale, multidisciplinary course-based undergraduate research experience program (CRE) developed at Lawrence Technological University (LTU). In our program, all students enrolled in CRE classes participate in authentic research experiences within the framework of the curriculum, eliminating self-selection processes and other barriers to traditional extracurricular research experiences.
Methods
Since 2014, we have designed and implemented more than 40 CRE courses in our College of Arts and Sciences involving more than 30 instructors from computer science, mathematics, physics, biology, chemistry, English composition, literature, philosophy, media communication, nursing, and psychology.
Results
Assessment survey data indicates that students who participate in CRE courses have an enhanced attitude towards research and discovery, as well as increased self-efficacy. This intervention is particularly relevant for non-traditional students, such as students who commute and/or have significant work or childcare commitments, who often experience limited access to research activities.
Discussion
Herein we highlight the importance of a systemic institutional change that has made this intervention sustainable and likely to outlast the external funding phase. Systemic change can emerge from a combination of conditions, including: (1) developing a critical mass of CRE courses by providing instructors with both incentives and training; (2) developing general principles on which instructors can base their CRE activities; (3) securing and maintaining institutional support to promote policy changes towards a more inclusive institution; and (4) diversifying the range of the intervention, both in terms of initiatives and disciplines involved.
... More recently, an interview study coded student responses to three broad questions reflecting on their experiences in a CURE, with codes corresponding to each element in the CSR (21). The results showed striking differences in which elements of the CSR were emphasized, based on whether students participated in bench-based or computerbased projects. ...
Researchers who work on course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) and issues related to science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) retention have begun exploring changes in student thinking about what it means to be a scientist. To support this effort, we developed rubrics to score answers to three open-response prompts: What does it mean to think like a scientist? What does it mean to do science? and Did you do real research in your coursename labs? The rubric development process was iterative and was based on input from the literature, experienced researchers, and early-career undergraduates. A post hoc analysis showed that the rubric elements map to 27 of 31 statements in the Culture of Scientific Research (CSR) framework, suggesting that scored responses to the three prompts can assess how well students understand what being a science professional entails. Scores on responses from over 400 students who were starting an introductory biology course for majors furnish baseline data from the rubrics and suggest that (i) undergraduates at this level have, as expected, a novice-level understanding of CSR, and (ii) level of understanding in novice students does not vary as a function of demography or academic preparation. Researchers and instructors are encouraged to add CSR to their list of learning objectives for CUREs and consider assessing it using the rubrics provided here.
Articulating the rules, roles, and values that are expected of undergraduate researchers is important as we strive to create a more accessible path into the scientific community. Rules refer to skills required of scientists, roles refer to behaviors consistent with the expectations of a scientist, and values refer to beliefs of the scientific community. Doctoral student mentors have great potential to serve as agents of influence for undergraduate researchers as undergraduates engage in the process of learning to be a scientist through legitimate peripheral participation. As such, we argue that doctoral students are partially responsible for identifying and promoting the rules, roles, and values that undergraduate researchers develop in scientific research. However, few studies have examined what rules, roles, and values are appreciated, or perceived as desirable, by doctoral students and thus expected of undergraduate research mentees. To address this gap, we surveyed 835 life sciences doctoral students who had mentored or would eventually mentor undergraduate researchers. We assessed what qualities and beliefs they appreciate in undergraduate researchers and what advice they would give to undergraduates to maximize their experiences in research. We analyzed their open‐ended responses using inductive coding and identified specific rules (e.g., effectively communicate), roles (e.g., demonstrate a strong work ethic), and values (e.g., be driven by intrinsic passion) that doctoral students wrote about. We used logistic regression to determine whether demographics predicted differences among doctoral student responses. We found that gender, race/ethnicity, and college generation status predicted what rules, roles, and values doctoral students appreciated and advised undergraduates to adopt. This research illuminates what rules, roles, and values undergraduate researchers are expected to uphold and identifies relationships between mentor identities and the advice they pass on to students.
Nursing education involves extensive training to develop critical thinking and decision-making skills that are essential for effective patient care. Research is a crucial component of nursing education as it provides opportunities for students to gain new knowledge and apply evidence-based practices. However, undergraduate nursing students often view research as a challenging and intimidating task. Negative perceptions and lack of resources and support can hinder students' ability to conduct research successfully. This article emphasizes the importance of research in nursing education and highlights the challenges that undergraduate nursing students face when conducting research. It also explores ways in which nursing schools can provide necessary resources and support to overcome these challenges and help students develop research skills. By doing so, nursing students can become more confident and effective practitioners based on evidence-based practice, contributing to better patient outcomes.
