This work was partially supported by a NSF RCN-UBE grant (NSF DBI-1450729) for the Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences Network
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
Undergraduates -- Research -- Evaluation, College student development programs, Life sciences -- Study and teaching (Higher), Life sciences -- Curricula
Course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) meet national recommendations for integrating research experiences into life science curricula. As such, CUREs have grown in popularity and many research studies have focused on student outcomes from CUREs. Institutional change literature highlights that understanding faculty is also key to new pedagogies succeeding. To begin to understand faculty perspectives on CUREs, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 61 faculty who teach CUREs regarding why they teach CUREs, what the outcomes are, and how they would discuss a CURE with a colleague. Using grounded theory, participant responses were coded and categorized as tangible or intangible, related to both student and faculty-centered themes. We found that intangible themes were prevalent, and that there were significant differences in the emphasis on tangible themes for faculty who have developed their own independent CUREs when compared with faculty who implement pre-developed, national CUREs. We focus our results on the similarities and differences among the perspectives of faculty who teach these two different CURE types and explore trends among all participants. The results of this work highlight the need for considering a multi-dimensional framework to understand, promote, and successfully implement CUREs.
Shortlidge, E. E., Bangera, G., & Brownell, S. E. (2017). Each to Their Own CURE: Faculty Who Teach Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Report Why You Too Should Teach a CURE. Journal Of Microbiology & Biology Education, 18(2), doi:10.1128/jmbe.v18i2.1260