Integrating Discovery-Based Research into the Undergraduate Curriculum Report of a Convocation (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix B: Commissioned Paper: The Consortium as Experiment
Appendix B: Commissioned Paper: The Consortium as Experiment
Pages 101-122
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 101... ...
The latter assertion leads naturally to the theme of the current convocation on integrating discovery-based research into the undergraduate curriculum. My intended contribution to this discussion is a result of my work in the assessment of student learning in undergraduate science and in particular my familiarity with a successful discovery-based program, the Genomics Education Partnership.
|
From page 102... ...
This knowledge informed the development of a new survey, the Survey of Undergraduate Research Experiences (SURE) (supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute)
|
From page 103... ...
. Later, on the CURE survey, students evaluated their learning gains from the above course elements.
|
From page 104... ...
Courses from instructors not emphasizing CURE components form the "low research-like", or Low Res group. The student ratings of gains from course elements reflected the instructors' intent.
|
From page 105... ...
. The results indicate that GEP students report learning gains comparable to URE students.
|
From page 106... ...
The parallel case of the nonspecific in CURE research is the course instructor. If CUREs are to be employed across institutions to help produce the 1 million additional STEM graduates that PCAST recommends, then course instructors will loom as a major nonspecific in any model of the CURE.
|
From page 107... ...
, I have been impressed with the level of talent and dedication that course instructors bring to their task. For example, the Genomics Education Partnership currently includes faculty from over 100 institutions, united in their determination to bring genomics into the undergraduate biology curriculum.
|
From page 108... ...
In other words, the observation that research on the nature of CURE programs is flawed because the students/research participants are non-randomly willing to be engaged with STEM programs is not a serious objection to the research methodology that yields results applicable to other students engaged with STEM programs. Related to the discussion of sampling from reference populations is the issue of assigning research participants into treatment or comparison groups.
|
From page 109... ...
I will attempt to clarify this view with reference to two widely discussed student characteristics: persistence and scientific identity. Persistence, for example, is a widely used term variously described as either the behavior of a student within a CURE experience or the continuation of the student's journey from one science course to the next, perhaps then extending to a URE and an application to a STEM graduate program.
|
From page 110... ...
Although I found LURE to be a stimulating and interesting experience, I wanted to broaden my summer research experiences to include some of my other interests. Definitely.
|
From page 111... ...
The term has a long and varied history in psychology and sociology. The URE/CURE research literature hypothesizes a construct, scientific identity, which serves as a mediator between learning experiences and commitment to a science career.
|
From page 112... ...
While some respondents could articulate a relation between their undergraduate science education and their later lives, I recall two comments that I think illustrate the difficulty of using the term scientific identity. One respondent, reflecting on her situation 5 years after graduation, reported "after completing my MS degree, I decided I was tired of working in the sciences and wanted to do something completely different." Another respondent wrote, "I was at a wonderful Ph.D.
|
From page 113... ...
. Many published accounts of CURE programs qualify as quasi-experiments; however, studies of a single institutional program lack the richness of information that is provided by the study of a CURE over multiple settings.
|
From page 114... ...
For example, a survey eliciting student ratings of a CURE experience may correlate with a measure of student lab attendance. To the extent that they do not correlate perfectly, the sources of error for the survey may be that students misinterpret survey questions or have reading difficulties, while for attendance students may have non-voluntary absences due to illness.
|
From page 115... ...
Generally, the GEP students report learning gains comparable to those reported by the URE students. In addition to the close proximity of the mean scores, the pattern of results, i.e., how the means compare within a group, appears similar for the GEP and URE students.
|
From page 116... ...
rated 20 items for learning gains. Students in the GEP program in 2012 (N = 397)
|
From page 117... ...
Pretest scores were indistinguishable between groups and so are combined. The higher mean score for the GEP posttest combined with the lack of change in the control group argues against the rival hypothesis that posttest gains were due to maturation (162 GEP students and 106 comparison students)
|
From page 118... ...
Taking the multi-operational approach, we explored the relationship between quiz scores as a measure of gains in content knowledge and student self-report of learning gains. The student survey used for the GEP includes both the items mentioned above as part of the SURE survey as well as items specifically related to features of the research project.
|
From page 119... ...
Jordan and her colleagues created a test of biological concepts to be administered both to students in an experimental SEA PHAGES program and to controls. The intent of the testing was to demonstrate that the mean scores for the two groups would not differ, thus resisting the criticism that involvement in a CURE program might interfere with learning course content, and indeed they did not (Jordan, et al., 2014)
|
From page 120... ...
FIGURE B-10. The same four quartiles of instructional time shown in Figure 9 were used to display mean student scores on 20 self-reported learning gains.
|
From page 121... ...
If, as I suspect many CURE researchers believe, the CURE program is an occasion for shaping scientific motives and ways of thinking that may result in an interest in STEM fields beyond just graduation, then we should acknowledge the importance of self-report measures. Some 20 or so years ago the conversations regarding assessment of student learning generally fell into describing a dichotomy between "direct" and "indirect" measures of learning.
|
From page 122... ...
As presented above, I have argued that the main features of this strategy should be to emphasize the effectiveness of teaching and learning practices in the learning environment, to distinguish between attrition and attraction of potential science graduates, to avoid describing student success in dispositional terms, and to understand the advantages of a multi-operational approach to research in a consortium. Using the scope and diversity of the science education consortium, we should be able to discover the commonalities and contrasts in practice that will expand successful undergraduate science education.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.