Carly A. Busch's research while affiliated with Arizona State University and other places

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.

Study I assesses whether LGBTQ+ science and engineering instructors reveal their identities in various contexts and why they reveal or conceal to undergraduate students. Study II demonstrates via undergraduates’ evaluations of a teaching demonstration video that an instructor coming out does not affect perceptions of teaching and improves rapport.

Few college science instructors reveal concealable identities to students, causing undergraduates to perceive exaggerated underrepresentation of those identities.

Stress is among the top mental health concerns of US college students and hypothesized to be especially high among pre-med students. Yet, the extent to which pre-meds’ stress differs from other college science students’ stress, as well as the underlying factors contributing to pre-meds’ stress are understudied. Given that stress is disproportionately likely to impact students who are already underrepresented and underserved in science and medicine, it is integral to identify what underlies student stress. Study Objective: We conducted a sequential mixed-methods study to identify what factors exacerbate pre-med stress and the severity of pre-med stress compared to students who are not pre-med. Hypothesis: We hypothesized the competitive nature of being pre-med would account for the majority of pre-med stress and that their overall stress levels would be higher than those of their counterparts. Methods: In Study 1, we conducted an exploratory qualitative interview study with 30 undergraduate pre-meds to assess what aspects of being pre-med exacerbate their stress. We built on this work in Study 2, with a survey of 551 science undergraduates to (a) assess how generalizable the findings from Study 1 were among undergraduate pre-meds at scale and to (b) assess whether students with different career tracks express different levels of stress. Our specific research questions were: 1) On average, do students perceive that pre-meds have higher stress than non-pre-med science majors? 2) Do pre-meds report higher levels of academic stress, perfectionism, social comparison, and perceived competitive environment in science college courses? 3) What aspects of being pre-med induce stress? and 4) What recommendations do pre-meds have for instructors and institutions to decrease pre-med stress? We used open coding methods and regressions to analyze our data. Results: We found that most students perceived that pre-med students had higher stress than their peers. However, while pre-meds reported higher levels of social comparison, they did not express higher academic stress, perfectionism, or perceived competition compared to their peers in science. Regardless of career path, being a woman or non-binary, identifying as a person excluded because of their ethnicity or race (PEER), financially unstable and having a lower GPA significantly predicted a higher academic stress score. Aspects of the medical school application underlying pre-med stress include worrying about not being good enough or maintaining a competitive GPA. Conclusion: This study highlights the levels of stress among pre-meds do not differ compared to non-pre-med science undergraduates, but that women or non-binary students, PEERs, students who are financially unstable and those with lower GPAs are more likely to experience stress in the context of undergraduate science. This work provides student-produced recommendations for ways in which instructors and institutions can decrease the stress associated with being a pre-med student. This study was funded by an ASU Online Undergraduate Research Scholars program seed grant. Graduate student Mohammed is funded by an NSF GRFP #026257-001 and PI Cooper is funded by an NSF CAREER #2143671. This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2024 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.

Concealable stigmatized identities (CSIs) are identities that can be kept hidden and carry negative stereotypes depending on the culture of a particular context; common examples of CSIs in the U.S. are struggling with mental health and LGBTQ+ identities. In order to understand the potential influence instructors have as role models for their students based on CSIs, we must first explore the identities instructors have and whether they disclose those identities to their students. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a study to examine (1) to what extent science instructors hold concealable identities, (2) whether they reveal those identities to undergraduates, and (3) how the prevalence of CSIs among science instructors compares to their prevalence among science undergraduates. We contacted every science instructor whose email we could find from very high research activity (R1) institutions and a subset completed the survey (N = 1,248); the survey began with a suite of demographic questions, including potential CSIs. For each CSI reported, instructors indicated the extent to which they revealed these identities to undergraduates. We surveyed a national sample of science undergraduate students from R1 institutions (N = 2,428) and asked whether they identified as having any of the CSIs included on the instructor survey. The most common CSIs among instructors were currently or previously having anxiety (35.4%) and being a first-generation college student (29.0%). Across all CSIs, relatively few instructors revealed their identities to students. When compared to the prevalence of the CSIs among undergraduates, we found the largest mismatches, calculated by subtracting the percent of undergraduates from the percent of instructors with each CSI, in reporting struggling academically in college (-30%), anxiety (-25%), and depression (-24%). For all identities, the mismatch between instructors and undergraduates grew when accounting for whether instructors revealed the CSI to their students. Given the potential for instructors to act as role models for students, understanding what identities instructors hold and the extent to which they share them with students is important to consider as we work toward creating a more diverse and inclusive scientific community. National Science Foundation. This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2024 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.

Background Increasingly, college science courses are transitioning from a traditional lecture format to active learning because students learn more and fail less frequently when they engage in their learning through activities and discussions in class. Fear of negative evaluation (FNE), defined as a student’s sense of dread associated with being unfavorably evaluated while participating in a social situation, discourages undergraduates from participating in small group discussions, whole class discussions, and conversing one-on-one with instructors. Objective This study aims to evaluate the acceptability of a novel digital single-session intervention and to assess the feasibility of implementing it in a large enrollment college science course taught in an active learning way. Methods To equip undergraduates with skills to cope with FNE and bolster their confidence, clinical psychologists and biology education researchers developed Project Engage, a digital, self-guided single-session intervention for college students. It teaches students strategies for coping with FNE to bolster their confidence. Project Engage provides biologically informed psychoeducation, uses interactive elements for engagement, and helps generate a personalized action plan. We conducted a 2-armed randomized controlled trial to evaluate the acceptability and the preliminary effectiveness of Project Engage compared with an active control condition that provides information on available resources on the college campus. Results In a study of 282 upper-level physiology students, participants randomized to complete Project Engage reported a greater increase in overall confidence in engaging in small group discussions (P=.01) and whole class discussions (P<.001), but not in one-on-one interactions with instructors (P=.05), from baseline to immediately after intervention outcomes, compared with participants in an active control condition. Project Engage received a good acceptability rating (1.22 on a scale of –2 to +2) and had a high completion rate (>97%). Conclusions This study provides a foundation for a freely available, easily accessible intervention to bolster student confidence for contributing in class. Trial Registration OSF Registries osf.io/4ca68 http://osf.io/4ca68

Fear of negative evaluation (FNE), defined as a sense of dread associated with being negatively judged in a social situation, has been identified as the primary factor underlying undergraduate anxiety in active-learning science courses. However, no quantitative studies have examined the extent to which science undergraduates experience FNE and how they are impacted by FNE in college science courses. To address this gap, we surveyed 566 undergraduates from one university in the U.S. Southwest who were enrolled in life sciences courses where they had opportunities to speak in front of the whole class. Participants were asked a suite of questions regarding their experiences with FNE in large-enrollment college science courses. We found that first-generation college students, LGBTQ+ students, and students with disabilities reported disproportionately high levels of FNE compared with their counterparts. Additionally, students reported that FNE can cause them to overthink their responses and participate less in class. Participants rated being cold called and presenting alone as forms of whole-class participation that elicit the highest levels of FNE. This research highlights the impact of FNE on undergraduates and provides student-generated recommendations to reduce FNE in active-learning science courses.

Concealable stigmatized identities (CSIs) are hidden identities that carry negative stereotypes and can result in a loss of social status if revealed. Instructors often choose to conceal these CSIs due to anticipated negative student reactions, yet revealing CSIs can have a positive impact on undergraduates. Women are generally more likely to reveal personal aspects about themselves in social situations, but may face greater consequences for revealing a stigmatized identity to students given their already marginalized position in academic science and engineering. Therefore, in this study, we were interested in understanding to what extent there are differences between men and women science and engineering instructors in (i) the representation of CSIs, (ii) their decisions to reveal CSIs to undergraduates in their classes, and (iii) their perceived stigma of CSIs. Based on a national survey of over 2,000 instructors in science and engineering from very high research activity doctoral institutions, we found that women were more likely than men to report having depression, anxiety, or a disability. Of instructors who held CSIs, women had 1.5x higher odds than men of revealing their CSIs to some undergraduates compared to no undergraduates and perceived greater stigma associated with all CSIs. Despite perceiving greater stigma associated with concealable stigmatized identities, women are more likely to reveal their CSIs to college science and engineering students, leading the way to a more diverse and inclusive scientific community by demonstrating themselves as role models for these identities.

College science courses continue to transition from traditional lecture to active learning, which has been shown to have both alleviating and exacerbating effects on undergraduate mental health. Notably, existing studies have primarily examined the relationship between active learning and anxiety, and no studies have specifically assessed the relationship between active learning and depression. To address this gap, we conducted hourlong exploratory interviews with 29 undergraduates from six institutions who identify as having depression and who had been enrolled in at least one active-learning college science course. We probed how undergraduates' depression affects their experiences in active learning, and in turn, what aspects of active-learning practices exacerbate or alleviate students' depressive symptoms. Students described that their depression negatively impacted their cognitive domains, which could make learning and social interactions challenging. Additionally, we found that the underlying aspects of active-learning practices that impact students' depression fall into four overarching categories: opportunities to compare oneself with others, socializing with others while learning, frequent formative evaluation, and engagement in learning. Each of these aspects of active learning could alleviate and/or exacerbate depressive symptoms. This work supports recommendations to create more inclusive active-learning courses for students with depression.

UNSTRUCTURED Increasingly, college science courses are transitioning from traditional lecture format to active learning because students learn more and fail less frequently when they engage in their learning through activities and discussions in class. Fear of negative evaluation, defined as a student’s sense of dread associated with being unfavorably evaluated while participating in a social situation, discourages undergraduates from participating in small group discussions, whole class discussions, and conversing one-on-one with instructors. To equip undergraduates with skills to cope with fear of negative evaluation and bolster their confidence, clinical psychologists, and biology education researchers developed Project Engage, a digital, self-guided single-session intervention for college students. It teaches students strategies for coping with fear of negative evaluation with the aim of bolstering their confidence. Project Engage provides biologically-informed psychoeducation, utilizes interactive elements for engagement, and helps generate a personalized action plan. In a study of 282 upper-level physiology students, participants randomized to complete Project Engage reported greater increases in overall confidence in engaging in small group discussions (p=.013) and whole class discussions (p< .001) but not in one-on-one interactions with instructors (p=.051), from baseline to immediate post-intervention, compared to participants in an active control condition. Project Engage received a high acceptability rating (1.22 on a scale of -2 to +2), and had a high completion rate (>97%). This work provides a foundation for a freely available, easily accessible intervention to bolster student confidence for contributing in class.